Recent Changes for "Target Debate" - Davis Wiki

Target Debate

JasonAller — 2008-08-20 15:59:01

link fixes

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 27:	Line 27:
- I agree. -["NickSchmalenberger"] - - Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.--["GrumpyoldGeek"] - - Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] - - Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predecessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly development forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"] - - Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? --["GrumpyoldGeek"] - - The only way you could apply some hypocracy to Mace Ranch residents is if they were Davis residents before Mace Ranch was built, supported the development of Mace Ranch, moved to Mace Ranch, and now do not support Target. I think those individuals are few and far between. What you have are residents of Davis whose first homes were in Mace Ranch. They weren't here for the growth debate. Mr Thober, I'm not sure what you expected people to do- not move into Mace Ranch? Create a nation-wide boycott to stop anyone from purchasing a home in Mace Ranch? Target would be a useful store in Davis, but its location is less than satisfactory. ["JimSchwab"] - I am one of those people who lived in Davis, moved to Mace Ranch, and do not support Target at this location and the poorly designed and community-ill-fitting imposement of a store. Personally, it might work better out by Wildhorse or the hospital where it can better serve the central Davis core, than the freeway impulse-stoppers. --["JeffWood"]	+ I agree. -["Users/NickSchmalenberger"] + + Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.--["Users/GrumpyoldGeek"] + + Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["Users/GrumpyoldGeek"] + + Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predecessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly development forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["Users/PaulThober"] + + Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? --["Users/GrumpyoldGeek"] + + The only way you could apply some hypocracy to Mace Ranch residents is if they were Davis residents before Mace Ranch was built, supported the development of Mace Ranch, moved to Mace Ranch, and now do not support Target. I think those individuals are few and far between. What you have are residents of Davis whose first homes were in Mace Ranch. They weren't here for the growth debate. Mr Thober, I'm not sure what you expected people to do- not move into Mace Ranch? Create a nation-wide boycott to stop anyone from purchasing a home in Mace Ranch? Target would be a useful store in Davis, but its location is less than satisfactory. ["Users/JimSchwab"] + I am one of those people who lived in Davis, moved to Mace Ranch, and do not support Target at this location and the poorly designed and community-ill-fitting imposement of a store. Personally, it might work better out by Wildhorse or the hospital where it can better serve the central Davis core, than the freeway impulse-stoppers. --["Users/JeffWood"]
Line 71:	Line 71:
- Putting a Target in Davis would put a lot of the local stores that supply similar goods out of business, namely mom and pops like Ace Hardware, Longs Drugs, The Gap and Office Max. ["LeightonHinkley"]	+ Putting a Target in Davis would put a lot of the local stores that supply similar goods out of business, namely mom and pops like Ace Hardware, Longs Drugs, The Gap and Office Max. ["Users/LeightonHinkley"]
Line 75:	Line 75:
- Target rocks. Who gives a crap if local businesses go out of business. if they can't compete with a bulk goods store, then obviously they have nothing worthwhile to contribute to Davis except overpriced crap. Target donates money to local schools too. Think of the children. ["ApolloStumpy"] - * Rediculous. I dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at ridiculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they weren't planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["MattHh"] - * Who in their right mind goes grocery shopping at Target? I imagine it would be convenient, if your diet consisted largely of Snackwells and string cheese...and if that was the case, your life expectancy would probably precede the Second Street Crossing completion date. ["LeightonHinkley"] - * Many Targets (and most non-Californian Walmarts) have a separate section that it a full supermarket, roughly similar to Safeway, complete with deli, bakery, butcher and produce section and row upon row of everything from apple chips to frozen waffles. They are ''not'' mini supermarkets, but rather large, full service supermarkets with sprouts, fresh herbs, a variety of imported cheeses, seafood, a full selection of soups and sauces, etc. Of course, this one is a pretty small store (compared to the national sizes), so I can't say it will have such a grocery inside it. But it isn't likely the "Snackwells and string cheese aisle" you're picturing. --["JabberWokky"]	+ Target rocks. Who gives a crap if local businesses go out of business. if they can't compete with a bulk goods store, then obviously they have nothing worthwhile to contribute to Davis except overpriced crap. Target donates money to local schools too. Think of the children. ["Users/ApolloStumpy"] + * Rediculous. I dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at ridiculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they weren't planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["Users/MattHh"] + * Who in their right mind goes grocery shopping at Target? I imagine it would be convenient, if your diet consisted largely of Snackwells and string cheese...and if that was the case, your life expectancy would probably precede the Second Street Crossing completion date. ["Users/LeightonHinkley"] + * Many Targets (and most non-Californian Walmarts) have a separate section that it a full supermarket, roughly similar to Safeway, complete with deli, bakery, butcher and produce section and row upon row of everything from apple chips to frozen waffles. They are ''not'' mini supermarkets, but rather large, full service supermarkets with sprouts, fresh herbs, a variety of imported cheeses, seafood, a full selection of soups and sauces, etc. Of course, this one is a pretty small store (compared to the national sizes), so I can't say it will have such a grocery inside it. But it isn't likely the "Snackwells and string cheese aisle" you're picturing. --["Users/JabberWokky"]
Line 96:	Line 96:
- You know all i got to say is that the Target Corp moving to davis is a horrible idea. there are 3 Targets within 18 miles of downtown Davis. They are probably going to close the Woodland one soon (Woodland Democract said that)... Have you thought about what that is going to do to the people who depend on those jobs... are you now going to be happy cause you can buy your crappy free trade imported crap and cheap process so someone making not even a living wage can drive form woodland, davis, west sac, dixon or somewhere else and sell it to you. their labor practices are horrible. they are building it next to a god damn EPA Superfund site. that's right, we can now buy some crappy crap right next to one of the most toxic clean up sites for a hundred mile radius. Big box stores suck, and if you went to the city council meetings, you woudl know that the tax revenue that we would get from the TArget does not add up because of increase in law enforcement, zoneing changes, etc... we would make between 40,-70,000 dollars as a city, which means nothing with the ammount of new traffic lights, cops, security, and cultural lameness that comes along with a Target. People need jobs, but not ones that keep you down, selling crap, not having medical or dental (full time only and they limit the number of those), and NO living wage. Think about what you REALLY need, WHERE all the imported consumer crap (all that GMO and corporate food and plants too) comes from, and if this is something that will actually benefit us as a town or community in any way... by the way if you need a can opener, borrow a neighbors or go to ace, or use a knife. don't be lazy, be creative... - ["CompostNolan" blessings...]	+ You know all i got to say is that the Target Corp moving to davis is a horrible idea. there are 3 Targets within 18 miles of downtown Davis. They are probably going to close the Woodland one soon (Woodland Democract said that)... Have you thought about what that is going to do to the people who depend on those jobs... are you now going to be happy cause you can buy your crappy free trade imported crap and cheap process so someone making not even a living wage can drive form woodland, davis, west sac, dixon or somewhere else and sell it to you. their labor practices are horrible. they are building it next to a god damn EPA Superfund site. that's right, we can now buy some crappy crap right next to one of the most toxic clean up sites for a hundred mile radius. Big box stores suck, and if you went to the city council meetings, you woudl know that the tax revenue that we would get from the TArget does not add up because of increase in law enforcement, zoneing changes, etc... we would make between 40,-70,000 dollars as a city, which means nothing with the ammount of new traffic lights, cops, security, and cultural lameness that comes along with a Target. People need jobs, but not ones that keep you down, selling crap, not having medical or dental (full time only and they limit the number of those), and NO living wage. Think about what you REALLY need, WHERE all the imported consumer crap (all that GMO and corporate food and plants too) comes from, and if this is something that will actually benefit us as a town or community in any way... by the way if you need a can opener, borrow a neighbors or go to ace, or use a knife. don't be lazy, be creative... - ["Users/CompostNolan" blessings...]
Line 98:	Line 98:
- * 10 miles to Woodland is a long way for people on bicycles, and Yolobus requires careful planning to make a trip -- ["KenBloom"] - *(your story makes me cry) ["DudeNude"]	+ * 10 miles to Woodland is a long way for people on bicycles, and Yolobus requires careful planning to make a trip -- ["Users/KenBloom"] + *(your story makes me cry) ["Users/DudeNude"]
Line 103:	Line 103:
- * Is going to the Yolobus stop on Covell and taking the bus directly to a Target shopping center on Gibson in Woodland really that hard? -- ["BonnieStewart"]	+ * Is going to the Yolobus stop on Covell and taking the bus directly to a Target shopping center on Gibson in Woodland really that hard? -- ["Users/BonnieStewart"]
Line 121:	Line 121:
- The problem of riding the bus to Target in Woodland is that the bus winds around in Davis before heading up to Woodland. If you ride your bike to the last stop in Davis before it heads out of town (or take unitrans), then catch the bus for the 10 miles to the first stop in Woodland (you can even take your bike on the bus), the trip is actually much shorter than an hour ride. This seems doable since you would consider riding all the way out to Mace Ranch to shop at the Target there. - ["SharlaDaly"]	+ The problem of riding the bus to Target in Woodland is that the bus winds around in Davis before heading up to Woodland. If you ride your bike to the last stop in Davis before it heads out of town (or take unitrans), then catch the bus for the 10 miles to the first stop in Woodland (you can even take your bike on the bus), the trip is actually much shorter than an hour ride. This seems doable since you would consider riding all the way out to Mace Ranch to shop at the Target there. - ["Users/SharlaDaly"]
Line 125:	Line 125:
- Target should never be allowed in Davis. Their support of sweatshops and cheap labor made goods cannot be forgiven. --["TobinJones"] - * Any references on this? --["RoyWright"]	+ Target should never be allowed in Davis. Their support of sweatshops and cheap labor made goods cannot be forgiven. --["Users/TobinJones"] + * Any references on this? --["Users/RoyWright"]
Line 128:	Line 128:
- * You're right; a few of those charges do sound troubling. The problem is that the term "sweatshop" is often used for both voluntary and involuntary conditions. But a couple of those cases do sound like actual coercion was involved. The site you link is hardly without biases, but it sounds like something worth looking into. I rarely set foot in Target anyway, much preferring Wal-Mart. --["RoyWright"]	+ * You're right; a few of those charges do sound troubling. The problem is that the term "sweatshop" is often used for both voluntary and involuntary conditions. But a couple of those cases do sound like actual coercion was involved. The site you link is hardly without biases, but it sounds like something worth looking into. I rarely set foot in Target anyway, much preferring Wal-Mart. --["Users/RoyWright"]
Line 131:	Line 131:
- I don't want that kind of power. Anyway, I've heard plenty of third world workers say that they want better pay, working hours, and such. Some even want workers' control over the factory. --["TobinJones"] - Well, the planning commission met, and I have to say, John Dewes, screw you. It was the standard corporate response, ass-covering, denying, shifting the blame, questioning of sources because they document events that happened two or three years ago. Screw you. You care more about profit than people. We will fight you all the way, you sweatshop owning exploiters. ["TobinJones"]	+ I don't want that kind of power. Anyway, I've heard plenty of third world workers say that they want better pay, working hours, and such. Some even want workers' control over the factory. --["Users/TobinJones"] + Well, the planning commission met, and I have to say, John Dewes, screw you. It was the standard corporate response, ass-covering, denying, shifting the blame, questioning of sources because they document events that happened two or three years ago. Screw you. You care more about profit than people. We will fight you all the way, you sweatshop owning exploiters. ["Users/TobinJones"]
Line 134:	Line 134:
- * "I much prefer Wal-Mart." Is that because they are more shameless about their awful business practices? Just wondering. [AnthonySoto] - * Hey, no worries, your kids will be having to deal with Target's abuse of employees. They'll thank you for the cheap diapers and socks you got in exchange. :) ["JeffWood"]	+ * "I much prefer Wal-Mart." Is that because they are more shameless about their awful business practices? Just wondering. ["Users/AnthonySoto"] + * Hey, no worries, your kids will be having to deal with Target's abuse of employees. They'll thank you for the cheap diapers and socks you got in exchange. :) ["Users/JeffWood"]
Line 138:	Line 138:
- Why should the citizens be allowed to decide whether or not a Target is built? Is it really our place to tell Target that they cannot build their complex of stores? I agree that we should not support a target, and boycotts would be something I would take part in and even help organize, but I do not think that it is our place to tell them whether or not they can build a building. I think that the proposition shouldn't have been put on the ballot; the citizens should not make zoning decisions, that's what we elect city officials to do. ["StephenHudson"]	+ Why should the citizens be allowed to decide whether or not a Target is built? Is it really our place to tell Target that they cannot build their complex of stores? I agree that we should not support a target, and boycotts would be something I would take part in and even help organize, but I do not think that it is our place to tell them whether or not they can build a building. I think that the proposition shouldn't have been put on the ballot; the citizens should not make zoning decisions, that's what we elect city officials to do. ["Users/StephenHudson"]
Line 140:	Line 140:
- * The Planning Commission did reject the zoning change, but the Council chose to do an end-run around their own advisors for reasons of their own by putting it on the ballot. ["JeffWood"]	+ * The Planning Commission did reject the zoning change, but the Council chose to do an end-run around their own advisors for reasons of their own by putting it on the ballot. ["Users/JeffWood"]
Line 144:	Line 144:
- Stupid lazy lower class people! take the bus to woodland if you like target and walmart and stop with your bitching and endless mindless debates. Do we really need two targets, two walmarts within 10 miles of each other. Quit whining and go ask your parents for enough money to buy a car. Pathetic. You are all transient residents of this community and poor stewards as such. Here is an idea! try stop thinking about your needs for one freaking second and think about what is best for the community you live in. You should know that shitting where you eat is a bad idea, even if you will only be eating here for 4 years. ["DudeNude"]	+ Stupid lazy lower class people! take the bus to woodland if you like target and walmart and stop with your bitching and endless mindless debates. Do we really need two targets, two walmarts within 10 miles of each other. Quit whining and go ask your parents for enough money to buy a car. Pathetic. You are all transient residents of this community and poor stewards as such. Here is an idea! try stop thinking about your needs for one freaking second and think about what is best for the community you live in. You should know that shitting where you eat is a bad idea, even if you will only be eating here for 4 years. ["Users/DudeNude"]
Line 148:	Line 148:
- * I'd like to point out that other than the fact that most UC Davis undergrads Graduate in their 5th and 6th years, Students as a population are here to stay, and are an enduring part of the community. We will be here next year, five years from now, and ten after that. And, ["Mike Levy" some] ["Lamar Heystek" of] ["Rob Roy" us] want to stay here and make even more of a difference and help the community for the community members (which include us). In response to "stupid lower class people," because my sarcasm detector has burnt out, I'm going to have to respond seriously: 1.) It isn't just the lower class who are for the target 2.) Why is it that while everyone is Davis seems to support programs for the poor, they don't want to see them (NIMBY)? To "endless mindless debates": 5 of the 13 edits before this were your responses. To "do we need two targets, two walmarts w/in 10 miles of each other": If people do not want to travel the 10 miles, and are passionate enough for another one, then they could say we do need two. I the word 'need' here is too subjective, and varies too much depending on your background, socioeconomic and political. "Quit whining and go ask your parents...buy a car": Some of us are poor, and thusly rely on a large amount of financial aid because we could not otherwise afford to be here. Also, I'd like to make a note of who was whining with the "anonymous" parentheses behind most comments. I've already addressed the transient residents issue, and as for poor stewards, We do not make many decisions, because we are not represented in the city council, because most students feel '''they shouldn't make decisions when they are only here for four years''', and so the cycle continues, and when we do make decisions, which are for the best interests of this significant portion of the community, they are lauded as being selfish and shortsighted. Now, if you, an upstanding member of the community, who presumes to be thinking about what is best for the community, goes in and destroys your credibility of opinion with the line "Stupid lazy lower class people," should I even have spent this effort responding to your ridiculous claims? Oh, and one more thing, please, tell me How you are sure that you know better than I do as to what is best for our community? How can either of us know whats best for something which affects the both of us? PS: Can you check your sarcasm detector, because I'm pretty sure the "Target Rocks" comment was there just to be controversial. Sound familiar?--["MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis]	+ * I'd like to point out that other than the fact that most UC Davis undergrads Graduate in their 5th and 6th years, Students as a population are here to stay, and are an enduring part of the community. We will be here next year, five years from now, and ten after that. And, ["Mike Levy" some] ["Lamar Heystek" of] ["Rob Roy" us] want to stay here and make even more of a difference and help the community for the community members (which include us). In response to "stupid lower class people," because my sarcasm detector has burnt out, I'm going to have to respond seriously: 1.) It isn't just the lower class who are for the target 2.) Why is it that while everyone is Davis seems to support programs for the poor, they don't want to see them (NIMBY)? To "endless mindless debates": 5 of the 13 edits before this were your responses. To "do we need two targets, two walmarts w/in 10 miles of each other": If people do not want to travel the 10 miles, and are passionate enough for another one, then they could say we do need two. I the word 'need' here is too subjective, and varies too much depending on your background, socioeconomic and political. "Quit whining and go ask your parents...buy a car": Some of us are poor, and thusly rely on a large amount of financial aid because we could not otherwise afford to be here. Also, I'd like to make a note of who was whining with the "anonymous" parentheses behind most comments. I've already addressed the transient residents issue, and as for poor stewards, We do not make many decisions, because we are not represented in the city council, because most students feel '''they shouldn't make decisions when they are only here for four years''', and so the cycle continues, and when we do make decisions, which are for the best interests of this significant portion of the community, they are lauded as being selfish and shortsighted. Now, if you, an upstanding member of the community, who presumes to be thinking about what is best for the community, goes in and destroys your credibility of opinion with the line "Stupid lazy lower class people," should I even have spent this effort responding to your ridiculous claims? Oh, and one more thing, please, tell me How you are sure that you know better than I do as to what is best for our community? How can either of us know whats best for something which affects the both of us? PS: Can you check your sarcasm detector, because I'm pretty sure the "Target Rocks" comment was there just to be controversial. Sound familiar?--["Users/MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis]
Line 164:	Line 164:
- *Low class: You'd be surprised how many middle class people do that as well, or do you mean class in terms of "classy" as opposed to economics? Beyond that, some people aren't informed and don't know of the troubles of target, and others it is a choice between a rock and a hard place, with target giving people what they need. We should think about and consider everybody, but traditionally, only the rich or upper-middle class have had that luxury, and if being lower class means looking out for yourself because you can't afford to not shop at Target, then there are even greater problems of inequity in America than just one Target in Davis. What would you be willing to sacrifice for us all to be on equal ground, and not exploiting foreign workers? What have you sacrificed so far? --["MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis] ''PS: I agree with considering the broader implications, but, I'd like to ask you to consider the concepts I pose at the end, which are those of even broader implications than Davis, Ca. I feel they get closer to the root of the matter, but may not be the right thing for a local wiki.''	+ *Low class: You'd be surprised how many middle class people do that as well, or do you mean class in terms of "classy" as opposed to economics? Beyond that, some people aren't informed and don't know of the troubles of target, and others it is a choice between a rock and a hard place, with target giving people what they need. We should think about and consider everybody, but traditionally, only the rich or upper-middle class have had that luxury, and if being lower class means looking out for yourself because you can't afford to not shop at Target, then there are even greater problems of inequity in America than just one Target in Davis. What would you be willing to sacrifice for us all to be on equal ground, and not exploiting foreign workers? What have you sacrificed so far? --["Users/MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis] ''PS: I agree with considering the broader implications, but, I'd like to ask you to consider the concepts I pose at the end, which are those of even broader implications than Davis, Ca. I feel they get closer to the root of the matter, but may not be the right thing for a local wiki.''
Line 203:	Line 203:
- Try asking him about the lowest income wages again. :) I mean, um, there were more Dewes hyjinks tonight. --["JosephBleckman"] - Oh, do tell. --["TobinJones"] - One of the Councilmen kept asking Dewes what the lowest income wage set could be. Tellingly Dewes answered at first by talking about their benefit package. When asked again he kept glancing back at his boss/comerades while saying that he couldn't answer due to the many different starting types. As he was continued to be grilled into answering the question that was the answer he gave over and over and over again. The man looked enormously flustered. Unfortunately the Councilman running that inquisition gave up rather than forcing him to give a non-B.S. answer. --["JosephBleckman"] - *What does how much Target pays have anything to do with this issue anyway? If they treat their employees so badly, THEY will suffer by not getting qualified people working for them. I bet there are plenty of employers in Davis downtown that can hardly compete with Target in terms of pay, benefit, and flexibility. Should we kick them out of Davis? Or would they be afraid that Davis employers can't compete with what Target offers their employees? From job opportunity perspective, there's absolutely nothing negative about having more options in Davis especially in a small town like Davis with tens of thousands of students. If you want to oppose Target, stick to NIMBY or No Big Box in my precious little town theories and don't waste time trying to make it an union/workers' right issue. --["BrianYasmin"]	+ Try asking him about the lowest income wages again. :) I mean, um, there were more Dewes hyjinks tonight. --["Users/JosephBleckman"] + Oh, do tell. --["Users/TobinJones"] + One of the Councilmen kept asking Dewes what the lowest income wage set could be. Tellingly Dewes answered at first by talking about their benefit package. When asked again he kept glancing back at his boss/comerades while saying that he couldn't answer due to the many different starting types. As he was continued to be grilled into answering the question that was the answer he gave over and over and over again. The man looked enormously flustered. Unfortunately the Councilman running that inquisition gave up rather than forcing him to give a non-B.S. answer. --["Users/JosephBleckman"] + *What does how much Target pays have anything to do with this issue anyway? If they treat their employees so badly, THEY will suffer by not getting qualified people working for them. I bet there are plenty of employers in Davis downtown that can hardly compete with Target in terms of pay, benefit, and flexibility. Should we kick them out of Davis? Or would they be afraid that Davis employers can't compete with what Target offers their employees? From job opportunity perspective, there's absolutely nothing negative about having more options in Davis especially in a small town like Davis with tens of thousands of students. If you want to oppose Target, stick to NIMBY or No Big Box in my precious little town theories and don't waste time trying to make it an union/workers' right issue. --["Users/BrianYasmin"]
Line 208:	Line 208:
- It's not a Davis downtown labor issue, but probably for different reasons than you think. If the Target is built, I wager that 80% of the labor force will be minorities from Dixon and Woodland. Why? Because they have a better work ethic and more flexible hours than most students. After all, how many UCD students are willing to put on the Target apron and push carts across the parking lot? How many UCD students will be able to schedule classes so that they can get out to the other side of town to put in 4 hours then come back across town? As to working conditions, I am sure that Target will not treat their employees as well as downtown merchants. I challenge you to go into Ace Hardware or Dibbert Lumber and ask the help if they are going to consider changing jobs to Target. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] - So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["BrianYasmin"]	+ It's not a Davis downtown labor issue, but probably for different reasons than you think. If the Target is built, I wager that 80% of the labor force will be minorities from Dixon and Woodland. Why? Because they have a better work ethic and more flexible hours than most students. After all, how many UCD students are willing to put on the Target apron and push carts across the parking lot? How many UCD students will be able to schedule classes so that they can get out to the other side of town to put in 4 hours then come back across town? As to working conditions, I am sure that Target will not treat their employees as well as downtown merchants. I challenge you to go into Ace Hardware or Dibbert Lumber and ask the help if they are going to consider changing jobs to Target. --["Users/GrumpyoldGeek"] + So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["Users/BrianYasmin"]
Line 211:	Line 211:
- Typical. --["TobinJones"] - - And how exactly does a lack of Target keep Davis "special and unique"? Thats BS, there are big box stores here, one more won't kill Davis, since the only possible competition is ACE, another big-box! -["AllisonEriksen"]	+ Typical. --["Users/TobinJones"] + + And how exactly does a lack of Target keep Davis "special and unique"? Thats BS, there are big box stores here, one more won't kill Davis, since the only possible competition is ACE, another big-box! -["Users/AllisonEriksen"]
Line 236:	Line 236:
- I) We keep hearing how the City of Davis needs the tax revenues generated by big stores. But one has to wonder just how much of this money is really needed and how much of it is simply being used to turn Davis into one big strip mall. I refer to the completely unneeded new "cop shop", the ridiculous Pole Line road "improvement" project that resulted in those stupid planter islands full of freeway bush and trees that will only make it harder to see the oncoming traffic, and the most recent fiasco, the phony brick "blurps" that were added to the major downtown intersections which resulted in much more traffic constriction (due to the loss of the "right turn lanes"), difficulty in accessing the four corner parallel parking spaces and an actual net loss of parking spaces. Maybe I could throw in the giant video cameras mounted on top of the "parking snarfer" vehicles. Too hard to reach out there with the chalk stick is it? Is this stuff really needed? I don't think so. I hate to have to be the one to point this out, but this stuff does not represent progress. It is simply represents the ultimate expression of conspicuous consumption, not exactly what a "forward thinking" community like Davis should be promoting. --["DavidDeCristoforo"]	+ I) We keep hearing how the City of Davis needs the tax revenues generated by big stores. But one has to wonder just how much of this money is really needed and how much of it is simply being used to turn Davis into one big strip mall. I refer to the completely unneeded new "cop shop", the ridiculous Pole Line road "improvement" project that resulted in those stupid planter islands full of freeway bush and trees that will only make it harder to see the oncoming traffic, and the most recent fiasco, the phony brick "blurps" that were added to the major downtown intersections which resulted in much more traffic constriction (due to the loss of the "right turn lanes"), difficulty in accessing the four corner parallel parking spaces and an actual net loss of parking spaces. Maybe I could throw in the giant video cameras mounted on top of the "parking snarfer" vehicles. Too hard to reach out there with the chalk stick is it? Is this stuff really needed? I don't think so. I hate to have to be the one to point this out, but this stuff does not represent progress. It is simply represents the ultimate expression of conspicuous consumption, not exactly what a "forward thinking" community like Davis should be promoting. --["Users/DavidDeCristoforo"]
Line 249:	Line 249:
- One of these Meassure K activists (pro? con? I don't care) sent an automatic-dialer poll to my cell phone. Isn't that against some law of some sort? -- ["MichaelGiardina"] - - It might have sounded automatic because of the tone of the voice of the speaker. After calling a few hundred people the activist will start to speak more automatically in the phone. I can tell you that the Yes on Measure K do not do automatic calls and I think it is against the law in certain circumstances. --["SteveOstrowski"]	+ One of these Meassure K activists (pro? con? I don't care) sent an automatic-dialer poll to my cell phone. Isn't that against some law of some sort? -- ["Users/MichaelGiardina"] + + It might have sounded automatic because of the tone of the voice of the speaker. After calling a few hundred people the activist will start to speak more automatically in the phone. I can tell you that the Yes on Measure K do not do automatic calls and I think it is against the law in certain circumstances. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]
Line 255:	Line 255:
- I know first hand that Yes on Measure K people will send voice mails that may sound like a computer because on occasion I sound like a computer or automatic message. Also I would like to point out that the Sierra Club will never be satisfied until all human construction is at a halt. This Target store is only one of a very few selected by LEED and if this building is environmentally unsound then all are. --["SteveOstrowski"]	+ I know first hand that Yes on Measure K people will send voice mails that may sound like a computer because on occasion I sound like a computer or automatic message. Also I would like to point out that the Sierra Club will never be satisfied until all human construction is at a halt. This Target store is only one of a very few selected by LEED and if this building is environmentally unsound then all are. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]
Line 259:	Line 259:
- Target is supported by a great many Christians in the Davis area and I know first hand the generosity of Target stores to Christian and secular charities and projects. You seem to imply that the governor's proposals are not Christian in which case I would like to explore those reasons on another forum. I do not believe that Target is a Christian issue other than the fact that many Christian students and families do support Target and as such I would like Measure K to pass. Also it should be noticed that the high ranking officials of LEAD and Student Focus are also for Target passing. --["SteveOstrowski"] - * Clearly Target exists to build churches and homeless shelters - I am sure it is not done for public relations to do one upmanship on WalMart in the slightest. Also, after much thought, I am going to refrain from criticizing you using peer pressure as your central argument to support this legislation. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] - - A bit off "target" here [snicker], but I'd like to qualify the Sierra Club comments; the group was pretty vehemently opposed to just about every proposed dog park site including one pre-approved by the City five years earlier. While I can't say that they want "all human construction halted," this is one former environmentalist who has found Sierra Club to be a bit over-zealous in protecting land from virtually all uses aside from birding. --["AlphaDog"] - - I returned home one day from a friend's house to find a "Yes on K" sign on my lawn, which was put up without my permission. I live on Anderson and I've been told that my lawn is a great advertising space. I just think it is really classy to put a sign on someone's private property without their permission. --["EnirytManaen"] - - If I see any of you anti-Target people there shopping for so much as a battery, I'm calling the police. It's like the vegans who wear leather belts and give you the "It's already dead and I'm not wasteful" excuse. It's like being a militant athiest then banging on the gates of heaven with tears in your eyes. It's like shaving your head and getting an SS tattoo, then seeing a hot Jew. You're gonna be bummed out when you need a tubesock. -- ["JoshFernandez"] - * Target doesn't sell socks in my size. I have to drive (horror) to Sacramento to find a place for clothes. Target doesn't meet my needs in this regard. Is that fair? -- ["JeffWood"]	+ Target is supported by a great many Christians in the Davis area and I know first hand the generosity of Target stores to Christian and secular charities and projects. You seem to imply that the governor's proposals are not Christian in which case I would like to explore those reasons on another forum. I do not believe that Target is a Christian issue other than the fact that many Christian students and families do support Target and as such I would like Measure K to pass. Also it should be noticed that the high ranking officials of LEAD and Student Focus are also for Target passing. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"] + * Clearly Target exists to build churches and homeless shelters - I am sure it is not done for public relations to do one upmanship on WalMart in the slightest. Also, after much thought, I am going to refrain from criticizing you using peer pressure as your central argument to support this legislation. -- ["Users/ChristopherMcKenzie"] + + A bit off "target" here [snicker], but I'd like to qualify the Sierra Club comments; the group was pretty vehemently opposed to just about every proposed dog park site including one pre-approved by the City five years earlier. While I can't say that they want "all human construction halted," this is one former environmentalist who has found Sierra Club to be a bit over-zealous in protecting land from virtually all uses aside from birding. --["Users/AlphaDog"] + + I returned home one day from a friend's house to find a "Yes on K" sign on my lawn, which was put up without my permission. I live on Anderson and I've been told that my lawn is a great advertising space. I just think it is really classy to put a sign on someone's private property without their permission. --["Users/EnirytManaen"] + + If I see any of you anti-Target people there shopping for so much as a battery, I'm calling the police. It's like the vegans who wear leather belts and give you the "It's already dead and I'm not wasteful" excuse. It's like being a militant athiest then banging on the gates of heaven with tears in your eyes. It's like shaving your head and getting an SS tattoo, then seeing a hot Jew. You're gonna be bummed out when you need a tubesock. -- ["Users/JoshFernandez"] + * Target doesn't sell socks in my size. I have to drive (horror) to Sacramento to find a place for clothes. Target doesn't meet my needs in this regard. Is that fair? -- ["Users/JeffWood"]
Line 271:	Line 271:
- For the love of god, someone make an "I <3 Child Labor" sign to put around town. We need them to defeat this unquestioning senseless corporate jingoism. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] - - The proposed Target in Davis has nothing to do with other corporate practices in Third World countries. That's like saying that every employee of Target is somehow supportive of child labor. --["SteveOstrowski"] - - * Oh give me a break. I think their "I heart Target, oh boy! Gush with happiness lolz!1" signs are completely ridiculous. I am trying to mock their campaign practices with analysis of the production process. You don't claim to love the environment and steamroll fields with asphalt and erect large shopping centers. Come on. I'm just waiting for Westfield to buy it out... -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] - - I am not against the idea of having a Target store in Davis. I am against the idea of having a 137,000 square foot Target store in Davis. I recognize that Davis residents need some of the things that Target can provide, and I also recognize that a lot of tax revenue bleeds to other cities when people have to go elsewhere to get these items. But that doesn't mean we need to start bringing in overly-huge megastores. We have successfully integrated many reasonably-sized chain stores in Davis -- Cost Plus, Borders, Dollar Tree, etc... I would much rather see a reasonably-sized (eg. 80,000 sq ft) Target with a couple of smaller stores next to it than an enormous Target with only one other store. I will be voting NO on K. --["AlexPomeranz"] - - Well the deal is that if this fails other corporate stores will not want to run the chance of trying to enter Davis and it will be years before Target or other stores will try. Also your argument is about size, a store that is on the eastern side not hurting anyone within most of the city. Bigger size means more products and more availability. It's like you can't say that I will disapprove of this large store but approve of another smaller one. This is it, whether or not to have a Target in Davis, not a debate over it's size. The debate over its size was dealt with a long time ago when the city send this development to the voters. --["SteveOstrowski"]	+ For the love of god, someone make an "I <3 Child Labor" sign to put around town. We need them to defeat this unquestioning senseless corporate jingoism. -- ["Users/ChristopherMcKenzie"] + + The proposed Target in Davis has nothing to do with other corporate practices in Third World countries. That's like saying that every employee of Target is somehow supportive of child labor. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"] + + * Oh give me a break. I think their "I heart Target, oh boy! Gush with happiness lolz!1" signs are completely ridiculous. I am trying to mock their campaign practices with analysis of the production process. You don't claim to love the environment and steamroll fields with asphalt and erect large shopping centers. Come on. I'm just waiting for Westfield to buy it out... -- ["Users/ChristopherMcKenzie"] + + I am not against the idea of having a Target store in Davis. I am against the idea of having a 137,000 square foot Target store in Davis. I recognize that Davis residents need some of the things that Target can provide, and I also recognize that a lot of tax revenue bleeds to other cities when people have to go elsewhere to get these items. But that doesn't mean we need to start bringing in overly-huge megastores. We have successfully integrated many reasonably-sized chain stores in Davis -- Cost Plus, Borders, Dollar Tree, etc... I would much rather see a reasonably-sized (eg. 80,000 sq ft) Target with a couple of smaller stores next to it than an enormous Target with only one other store. I will be voting NO on K. --["Users/AlexPomeranz"] + + Well the deal is that if this fails other corporate stores will not want to run the chance of trying to enter Davis and it will be years before Target or other stores will try. Also your argument is about size, a store that is on the eastern side not hurting anyone within most of the city. Bigger size means more products and more availability. It's like you can't say that I will disapprove of this large store but approve of another smaller one. This is it, whether or not to have a Target in Davis, not a debate over it's size. The debate over its size was dealt with a long time ago when the city send this development to the voters. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]
Line 285:	Line 285:
- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]	+ ["Users/ChristopherMcKenzie"]
Line 293:	Line 293:
- My first instinct was to vote against it and I'm not going to second guess myself. Even if target panders to Davis with it's leed building --["StevenDaubert"]	+ My first instinct was to vote against it and I'm not going to second guess myself. Even if target panders to Davis with it's leed building --["Users/StevenDaubert"]
Line 310:	Line 310:
- Thanks for reading and voting. -["KarlMogel"]	+ Thanks for reading and voting. -["Users/KarlMogel"]

Target Debate

JeremyOgul — 2008-07-15 12:51:31

community chambers

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 177:	Line 177:
- '''Public Forum begins around 8pm at ["City Hall"] in the ["City Council Community Chambers" Community Chambers], 23 ["Russell Boulevard" Russell Blvd.] on the corner of 5th & B'''	+ '''Public Forum begins around 8pm at ["City Hall"] in the ["Community Chambers"], 23 ["Russell Boulevard" Russell Blvd.] on the corner of 5th & B'''

Target Debate

JabberWokky — 2008-04-01 11:36:48

Revert to version 105.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
- wikispot has been pwned. happy april 1st. - - Papa I know you're going to be upset - 'Cause I was always your little girl - But you should know by now - I'm not a baby - - You always taught me right from wrong - I need your help, daddy please be strong - I may be young at heart - But I know what I'm saying - - The one you warned me all about - The one you said I could do without - We're in an awful mess, and I don't mean maybe - please - - Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep - Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep - But I made up my mind, I'm keeping my baby, oh - I'm gonna keep my baby, mmm... - - He says that he's going to marry me - We can raise a little family - Maybe we'll be all right - It's a sacrifice - - But my friends keep telling me to give it up - Saying I'm too young, I ought to live it up - What I need right now is some good advice, please - - Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep - Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep - But I made up my mind, I'm keeping my baby, oh - I'm gonna keep my baby, mmm... - Daddy, daddy if you could only see - Just how good he's been treating me - You'd give us your blessing right now - 'Cause we are in love, we are in love, so please - - Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep - Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep - But I made up my mind, I'm keeping my baby, oh - I'm gonna keep my baby, mmm... - Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep - Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep - - Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep - Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep - But I made up my mind, I'm keeping my baby, oh - I'm gonna keep my baby, mmm... - - Oh, I'm gonna keep my baby, ooh - Don't you stop loving me daddy - I know, I'm keeping my baby	+ [[Image(proposed_target.JPG, right, thumbnail, 400, "Sign located at the proposed site")]] + + '''The proposed location of ["Target"] in Davis will be at a location known as ["Second Street Crossing"].''' + + [[TableOfContents]] + + ==Small Town== + + I love how Davis is small, and I can get anywhere without driving, but it is missing something essential: a store worth shopping at. Aside from grocery shopping, which I do mostly at albertsons for the convenience of the self checkout, I usually have to go out of town if I need something. Sure, I could probably find it somewhere in town, but it would either be from a large chain with huge markups, or a mom & pop's that seems intent on screwing me in the ass for some reason. I'm not poor, in the derogatory sense people use it around here, but I live on a budget, and paying an extra few dollars for every item I buy just doesn't make sense. At the same time, I don't feel good going to woodland or dixon every time I need something. This new Target could alleviate that. I understand the sympathy for local businesses, but if you need to have no competition to succeed, there may be something wrong with your business model. That is all. - GarrettTiemann + + I don't want a big box store in Davis. It kills the whole idea of being a "small town". - RaynatoCastro + * Right... that's why Folsom, which is still a small town, has a Target, Wal-Mart, Kohls, WinCo, had a Food Source and a former K-Mart where the Kohls is. Oh, and I completely forgot to mention Borders, Home Depot, and CostCo. --TR + + Well, ever since they put in Cost Plus, that whole idea is out the door. And plus a Target out by 24-hour would be an area that would not be in the middle of town. And also, Davis is not actually small. It has too few stores to serve its population that exceeds 50,000. - JaimeRaba + + While Cost Plus is a chain, they pander to the inner-yuppie in us all. Target is where poor people shop, shesh. - PhilipNeustrom + + "Poor People" do not shop at Target. Shopping at stores like this is a way for people to save $$$. To say that they are "poor" for doing so, is just plain ignorant. I go where I need to to get what I need without wasting $$$. This is how I keep from being "poor". - Aaron.Curtin + + What do you mean davis has too few stores to serve its population? People have enough crap as it is. - MarieHuynh + + Target will come. Cars/trucks/SUVs returning home from bay area jobs to Sacramento will follow. The city of Davis will get property taxes. Smaller more locally owned businesses will disappear. Davis residents will purchase heaps of things at amiable prices. Target execs will get rich. Target employees will pay rent, own a used car, and have barbecues. Third world exploitation will continue at a violent rate. Local and global environments will be degraded. Life will go on along its socially, economically, and environmentally unsustainable trajectory towards some sort of collapse. Charge! + + ==Mace Ranch== + + I find it wonderfully ironic that people in Mace Ranch are concerned about their quality of life being adversely affected by the building of a Target when they live in what is easily the ugliest, most unwanted development ever to be foisted on the city of Davis. I only wish it were a Walmart or something even more heinous - an adult superstore, prison, feedlot, - something like that. PaulThober + I agree. -["NickSchmalenberger"] + + Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.--["GrumpyoldGeek"] + + Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] + + Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predecessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly development forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"] + + Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? --["GrumpyoldGeek"] + + The only way you could apply some hypocracy to Mace Ranch residents is if they were Davis residents before Mace Ranch was built, supported the development of Mace Ranch, moved to Mace Ranch, and now do not support Target. I think those individuals are few and far between. What you have are residents of Davis whose first homes were in Mace Ranch. They weren't here for the growth debate. Mr Thober, I'm not sure what you expected people to do- not move into Mace Ranch? Create a nation-wide boycott to stop anyone from purchasing a home in Mace Ranch? Target would be a useful store in Davis, but its location is less than satisfactory. ["JimSchwab"] + I am one of those people who lived in Davis, moved to Mace Ranch, and do not support Target at this location and the poorly designed and community-ill-fitting imposement of a store. Personally, it might work better out by Wildhorse or the hospital where it can better serve the central Davis core, than the freeway impulse-stoppers. --["JeffWood"] + + ==Stuff to Buy== + + I could use a target right now. People need their reasonably priced tube socks, towels, toothpaste, deodorant, etc. - JaimeRaba + + People have to drive (burning fuel) to Woodland, Sacramento or Vacaville to obtain things that people need on a daily basis at a reasonable price. It is in fact what people do, so why not spare the air and put in some establishments that will keep tax revenues in our cash-strapped county? - JaimeRaba + * Agreed --TR + + BAHAHAHAHAHAHA... the truly cash strapped should stop wasting money on the car and BIKE more often. Then they'll have more money to buy stuff they really need. Anyone who can afford a car can afford the basic necessities. Target has a lot of JUNK. Those are not necessary to keep one alive. We have stores that sell food and they usually have other basic things people need. I have no car and do not go to Target but am still alive and well. Let those that can afford extra junk go the little bit of extra distance. Besides, Yolo County includes Woodland and West Sac - MarieHuynh + + No. See, by cash strapped county, I mean Yolo County has difficulty providing social services because it has a big population and not a big tax base. So they raise money primarily through taxing business. I think Prop 13 also negatively impacts this, because it sort of takes property taxes out of the mix. So, West Sacramento and Woodland's increasing amount of industrial complexes do provide somewhat of a tax basis, but then again they also have a lion's share of financial need. And one thing that is absolutely clear is that Davis students ALREADY go outside the county for their major purchases. So instead of spending money in Davis at the places openly criticized as being too expensive, they go elsewhere. And these are places you cannot bike to. Davis ALREADY has a big set of box stores that nobody really thinks of. In addition to the Cost Plus that mars the dorm-centric area of Davis, Davis also has several "box" car dealerships and "box" gyms and "box" auto repair shops. I think if one of these boxes (preferably in the mace/chiles area) held a store that would be more profitable to the inhabitants of Davis in terms of tax revenue and maybe actually giving them some value-priced merchandise, it would beneficial to all. -jr + When I think of major purchases, I think of computers, cars, and houses. I'd rather not have people buy lots of crap here or anywhere else, period. We don't NEED it. I don't care if it's cheap. And I really don't understand why students go and pay for memberships to gyms when they have a brand spanking new ARC. - MarieHuynh + Marie Huynh- People can buy whatever they feel like buying regardless if they NEED it or WANT it. If you are so insensed on people buying only what they need, I am sure multiple computers, pets, etc. also falls under the category of stuff "we don't need". Your opinions seem to only apply to what you think of others and not yourself. As for the Target issue, a couple "big box" stores will not hurt the so-called "small-town" appeal of Davis. Target is a matter of convience for cheap stuff. However, with the addition of more stores such as Walmart, Sams Club, Home Depot, etc. the balance between local business and large-scale retailers will negatively impact the small stores. - AshleyOrsaba + People need food, soap, shampoo, toothpaste, clothing, etc. That's what I'm talking about. That's what I'm talking about. And they waste tons of money buying it in Davis. In fact, I think the reason why students eat out so much, is because the supermarkets' mark-ups are so high. And if you need to buy a can opener? What do you do? You buy it at a 1000% markup at Safeway or Riteaid. It's not good. As far as gym membership, I think it's mostly people who don't have access to the ARC, or those who need 24-hour gym acess. Hey, you didn't even know there was a 24-Hour Fitness! - jr + + Yes, most people eat out at restaurants because Safeway is so expensive. That logic is so crystal clear that I think I will request that UCD give you an honorary degree. And can opener? Ever hear of Ace Hardware? I hadn't - that is why I got flogged at Rite Aid for $2.50. I so wish I had a Target-like store that sells them off at 22 cents each because I find myself needing to add one to my shiny collection nearly every week! But 4realz - Ace has almost everything that Target does and it's downtown. Get over it! + + + Just think!! Soon there will be a big box store in every town in America! What beauty! We can get all of our food, unneeded consumer goods, clothes, and anything else we even slightly desire under one big roof. Hear that + + ==Local Business== + + that is all the workers in free trade zones who made this stuff so happy that we are buying and buying that cheer in the back ground, that’s the sound of Target shareholders jumping for joy while Mom and Pop shops close in Davis. Oh convenience that is just what we need that will make things so much easier for US!!! This community does not need this place their stuff is cheaper because it is easier for big box stores to flood markets, get goods cheaper, while ignoring the people who made them, other local businesses, and the community they ‘serve’. Have it your way + + we’ll stop by Starbucks to get some coffee and get McDonalds on the way home from Target k?? Your cheap sox are well worth all of the environmental degradation, cheap abused labor from all over SE Asia, Africa, and the Americas, and the sadness of decades old mom and pop shops closing in ever town in the US. How convenient! + Okay, this really needs to be on its own page by now. However, a few thoughts. I agree that people are consumeristic to disgusting proportions. But you can't BOTH say that "hey waste fuel and drive to woodland," but also don't build a target nearby because of how it causes 3rd world countries to underpay and otherwise exploit their employees. Pick one. The fact of the matter is that Davis is a town that sells a lot of trinkets ("gifts!"), food and little else... there's really no DIRECT competition with Target. Their biggest direct competition would be with big chains like Rite Aid and Longs (and Grocery stores to some extent)-- didn't you notice? Davisites "import" just about everything. Target is a much better choice than Walmart because they tend to care a bit more about impact upon 3rd world countries--as well as greater selectivity in choosing its merchandise. They're not perfect however. But I think Target would be a good fit for Davis. But it just needs to be put in the right spot. --JaimeRaba + + Hey.. Better Target then Walmart. Either way, I think we could use some large all-purpose store. I don't have a car; I'm not biking over to Woodland, Dixon, or Vacaville to buy clothing. The "Mom and Pop" stores simply don't provide men's clothing. Gap? You have to be kidding me. Think I'm going to pay a ridiculous price for a label? Personally, I root for a Costco; good employee benefits and good prices. + + What about using target.com for socks if you feel you must have cheap ones and not burning gas or forcing davis to have a big box? + If you buy it from target.com you have to sign up and give them personal information. Then you have to pay extra for shipping. And gas is still burned by someone. UPS is burning gas to deliver the socks to your house. Most importantly, neither Yolo County nor the City of Davis recive any tax revenue. When people travel to Woodland, their tax dollars go to the city of Woodland. When people travel to Dixon, their tax dollars go to Dixon and Solano County. - ArlenAbraham + + Putting a Target in Davis would put a lot of the local stores that supply similar goods out of business, namely mom and pops like Ace Hardware, Longs Drugs, The Gap and Office Max. ["LeightonHinkley"] + + * My sarcasm detector just flew right off the scale on that one. At least, I hope its sarcasm. - AlexGarbutt + + Target rocks. Who gives a crap if local businesses go out of business. if they can't compete with a bulk goods store, then obviously they have nothing worthwhile to contribute to Davis except overpriced crap. Target donates money to local schools too. Think of the children. ["ApolloStumpy"] + * Rediculous. I dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at ridiculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they weren't planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["MattHh"] + * Who in their right mind goes grocery shopping at Target? I imagine it would be convenient, if your diet consisted largely of Snackwells and string cheese...and if that was the case, your life expectancy would probably precede the Second Street Crossing completion date. ["LeightonHinkley"] + * Many Targets (and most non-Californian Walmarts) have a separate section that it a full supermarket, roughly similar to Safeway, complete with deli, bakery, butcher and produce section and row upon row of everything from apple chips to frozen waffles. They are ''not'' mini supermarkets, but rather large, full service supermarkets with sprouts, fresh herbs, a variety of imported cheeses, seafood, a full selection of soups and sauces, etc. Of course, this one is a pretty small store (compared to the national sizes), so I can't say it will have such a grocery inside it. But it isn't likely the "Snackwells and string cheese aisle" you're picturing. --["JabberWokky"] + + AS: (think of your children when they are working in a sweatshop owned by China jackass) DudeNude + + Um....maybe the people who work for the local businesses, the people who shop at the local businesses, and the people who OWN the local businesses? You try working for Target, I can tell you first hand that it wouldn't be nearly as nice as working for a small independent business. -- BonnieStewart + + Well, if a target comes to town, then fine. Davis has been screaming about the potential death of downtown for years. Borders was going to do it, Cost Plus was going to do it, etc... It seems to be the rallying cry. "Save our downtown with its pricey boutique shops that students rarely visit." Then they wonder about sales tax leakage. Davis is no longer the small college town it once was. In other news, I saw a sign on Road 102 near Interstate 5 in Woodland stating that they would be opening a Costco and Target at that location. So the mall target will probably close down when that happens. -RogerClark + + I would be completely against a target, if it didn't have a niche in this market. Some things don't need to be high quality, they can just be cheap. Unfortunately there's nowhere in Davis that gets nowhere near this kind of goods. Ace gets close, and the products are high quality, but generally a good deal more expensive. My concerns about these businesses are less their global effect, eventually their business practices will turn around and bite them in the ass as places unionize, but more the damage they do to American communities. 10 years ago, a target would have been awful in davis, and would have retarded severely the growth of downtown. Today though, Downtown is a different place, and can stand independent of the cheap wares of target. I would rather shop at a local business, but unless one can fill the niche that target is filling, I don't see why capitalism can't just take it's course here. Char George + + I am still undecided about whether or not I would want a Target in Davis. I think that it would dramatically change the town, and may create a "broken window" effect that would make it easier for other big box stores to come to town. I really don't want this to happen. On the other hand, I think that Davis is losing a lot of tax revenue from people who go to stores like Target in other towns. My biggest gripe is the cost of clothing currently available in Davis. Last night I was walking around places downtown and it almost put me over the edge. All the clothing stores in town other than Gottschalks are "Boutiques" that sell only $90 tank tops and $300 jeans. I understand that the Naked Thread is all organic or sustainable, therefore worth their price, but at most of these places, the only reason behind the price is the brand. It's ridiculous. Also, most stores in Davis don't sell my size (XL-XXL). Whether it's at Target or not, I'd love to be able to shop for clothes in Davis and find something in my size that I can actually afford. -Janelle + + One thing people need to realize is that there currently is a limit to how large a retailer can have their store in Davis. I believe it is somewhere around 30,000 square feet. To make it worth their while, Target would require approximately 100,000 square feet. If Target does get built, laws that had prevented previous big box outlets from coming in will essentially be null. Regardless whether you are in favor of Target being built, I'm sure that we can agree that we don't need a Wal-Mart, K-mart, and Kohls. Repealing the law will make it infinitely more difficult to do so. + + Allowing Target to be built will prove problematic. What if they were to rework their store somewhere along the lines of what Ace has done?-JustinLanska + + ==Travel and Distance== + + You know all i got to say is that the Target Corp moving to davis is a horrible idea. there are 3 Targets within 18 miles of downtown Davis. They are probably going to close the Woodland one soon (Woodland Democract said that)... Have you thought about what that is going to do to the people who depend on those jobs... are you now going to be happy cause you can buy your crappy free trade imported crap and cheap process so someone making not even a living wage can drive form woodland, davis, west sac, dixon or somewhere else and sell it to you. their labor practices are horrible. they are building it next to a god damn EPA Superfund site. that's right, we can now buy some crappy crap right next to one of the most toxic clean up sites for a hundred mile radius. Big box stores suck, and if you went to the city council meetings, you woudl know that the tax revenue that we would get from the TArget does not add up because of increase in law enforcement, zoneing changes, etc... we would make between 40,-70,000 dollars as a city, which means nothing with the ammount of new traffic lights, cops, security, and cultural lameness that comes along with a Target. People need jobs, but not ones that keep you down, selling crap, not having medical or dental (full time only and they limit the number of those), and NO living wage. Think about what you REALLY need, WHERE all the imported consumer crap (all that GMO and corporate food and plants too) comes from, and if this is something that will actually benefit us as a town or community in any way... by the way if you need a can opener, borrow a neighbors or go to ace, or use a knife. don't be lazy, be creative... - ["CompostNolan" blessings...] + * CompostNolan: Again, people need shampoo and tubesocks outside the 1000% markup. And I can understand that you're a big fan of people burning fuel to go to "close" places such as Woodland's "Mall" Target. There are very few employers in Davis who provide good benefits. However, there are very many stores who sell cheap crap at huge markups. At least Target's markups less ruthless. I know there are many people who think a Target would be a losing proposition in terms of resources for the city. That's why I think the Target would do better out by Mace and Chiles rather than the proposed site. However, I also think the Proposed site would not cause a horrible amount of infrastructural nightmares for Davis, because, essentially, nothing is on 2nd street except "Box stores" containing gyms and other random things. And frankly, I think it's a bit whimsical to think that Targets require increased police presence. There are shoplifters everywhere. Target isn't going to draw in out-of-Davisers, since the Vacaville, Sacramento, and Woodland locations are close enough for essentially all outlying areas. The goods that people in Davis deserve are a long commute away. What ''some'' people seem to fail to realize is that ''people already go to Target'', and that people have a constant need for things that are sold there, and that people are being ripped off in Davis. OR, we could try and buy tubesocks at Ace. Great idea. + * 10 miles to Woodland is a long way for people on bicycles, and Yolobus requires careful planning to make a trip -- ["KenBloom"] + (your story makes me cry) ["DudeNude"] + this is a poor argument. first of all most places in davis are several miles away from the davis proposed target location. if you live in north davis the davis location will actually be slower to get to than the woodland location (according to mapquest). first of all a lot of people working at target would take the bus from woodland (no added pollution). also since the target is now in town, people will no longer do the occassional bulk buying trip (saving time and gas). now people will go to target every month or several times a month for that matter, actually this increases the polution because most of these people will be driving cars for 5 miles or so. how many people are going to seriously bike merchandise from target. i rairly see anyone doing that from a safeway thats only 1 mile or less away. + * Let's see... it makes much sense for me to bike or walk 10+ miles to the nearest Wal-Mart or Target, then carry, say 3 bags worth of necessities back 10 more miles on my bike. Yup, a Target in Davis is SUCH a bad thing... + + * Is going to the Yolobus stop on Covell and taking the bus directly to a Target shopping center on Gibson in Woodland really that hard? -- ["BonnieStewart"] + * No, but it is inconvenient. --TR + * Why don't you try it yourself? It only takes about 2 hours round-trip (minimum)? Two hours you say? Yes. The 42 leaves at the half and gets there around 25 minutes later where you must spend the next hour shopping because that is when the next bus arrives. Only need to grab a couple items? Tough, you gotta wait. Need a little more than an hour? Maybe 10 extra minutes? Well, then better plan to browse the aisles for the remainder of that hour. Add 30 minutes for the ride back to Davis and you're set. Thankfully the Yolo bus is free for students...otherwise I'd seriously consider resorting to using the Aggie newspaper the next time I run out of toilet paper...or you can do as some of my friends do: raid university bathrooms. What's that? There's a Rite Aid you say? Yes, the same Rite Aid that made a killing off of coat hangers (ONLY $3.50 a dozen) when I moved into the freshman dorms. To all you bandwagon jumpers that say a Target is bad...consider this: Students are forced to either be ripped off in Davis or take bus/commute regularly to Woodland/Vacaville for necessities at fair prices. If anything, my experience in Davis has changed my heinous view of Walmart. What Davis student could possibly need a $800 bed (offered downtown!) when a $80 futon from Walmart could do? Walmart was there for me when I needed to furnish my room on a student budget. As a "town" that prides itself in being a college-town the needs of its students should not be taken lightly. --Senioritis + + I will admit to being underslept (my bed deflated last night), but I will share an anecdote about going to Target by Yolobus. I don't have a car, and I needed to buy an air mattress today (and didn't want to pay what my other chainstore option Big 5 would charge, which was $20 more). And going to Target by Yolobus turns a minor errand into a 2-hour errand, since the schedule is such that you're going to be in Woodland for about 70 minutes, whether or not you want to. This wasn't much fun. I'm sure it's very easy for folks with cars to take them to Woodland, and my errand would have been about 40 minutes (drive, buy single item, leave). But 2 hours is a bit much. -dan brown + + Dan, an air mattress is a perfect example of disposable, wasteful consumerism. I've been there, and I know it is cheaper than buying a real mattress, but they don't last! Buy a real mattress, or a futon! + + Well if you bothered to read his page (or even bothered to consider that other people might be in a different living situation than you) you'd know that Dan is only going to be in Davis until next month. With that in mind, I don't find it wasteful at all that he's buying an air mattress instead of an expensive conventional mattress that he wouldn't be able to bring with him anyways. Please try to consider that other people may have different needs than your own before accusing them of "wasteful consumerism." - EyadDarras + + + Indeed, my understanding is that it would be illegal in California for me to sell a mattress at the end of next month to another person without first "fumigating" it. Further, I can't sleep on futon (I broke my back six years ago), and it turns out that a good $50 air mattress is good for about 150 nights of reasonably good sleep before it goes tilt (I patched it about 2 months ago with great success, but apparently two leaks is one too many). My real mattress, back home, cost a good 10-20 times as much, and will probably be used for about 20 times as long, but is going to be much more trouble to dispose of. I'm not thrilled about putting 10 pounds of plastic into my trash this weekend, but in the grand scheme of things, I don't feel especially guilty about it. I haven't been in a private car in two weeks; how long has it been for you? -dan brown + + I think an hour each way is pretty normal for intercity bus trips. Furthermore, longer trip time and misalignment with a personal schedule is an inherent disadvantage to taking public transportation. At the same time, it is an advantage because it provides the opportunity to better understand the geography and society of the area. There are tradeoffs between all choices in any situation and if they are better understood, the most appropriate choice for a particular situation can be more easily made. -NickSchmalenberger + You're right, of course, that this is probably reasonable for an inter-city trip. I'm just grumpy that I needed an inter-city trip to replace my stupid air mattress. If there were a Target in Davis, I would have walked there, and taken the bus home. [I am, however, much better slept today than I was yesterday, and consequently less grumpy.] -dan brown + + I initially started to read this page as a Yes on K voter and after reading the "Considerations" section further down, I have changed my mind. I have a suggestion for those that feel greatly affected by the transportation issue. Maybe a solution would be to create a ride-share program if unable to find a friend to car pool with (maybe even on wiki) for those that have the occasional desire to shop at Target since the route to the new Target though city streets would probably burn almost the same amount of gas as going to Woodland on hte highway (and the slight difference would be negligble if people car pooled anyway). I have to say that I have and probably will engage in Target shopping elsewhere and in the past I was able to share rides with friends since I didn't own a car. The idea of a store that is as large as two football fields is scary to me. I come from San Jose which is a prime example of poor city planning with huge chains and franchises wiping out any character or creativity. I originally was under the impression it was going to be a regular store and NOT an "Oh my god! I'm a huge consumering American" store. Foolish me. Heather Witt + + The problem of riding the bus to Target in Woodland is that the bus winds around in Davis before heading up to Woodland. If you ride your bike to the last stop in Davis before it heads out of town (or take unitrans), then catch the bus for the 10 miles to the first stop in Woodland (you can even take your bike on the bus), the trip is actually much shorter than an hour ride. This seems doable since you would consider riding all the way out to Mace Ranch to shop at the Target there. - ["SharlaDaly"] + + ==Target Sweatshops== + + Target should never be allowed in Davis. Their support of sweatshops and cheap labor made goods cannot be forgiven. --["TobinJones"] + Any references on this? --["RoyWright"] + * Sure: [http://www.knowmore.org/index.php/Target_Corporation] + * You're right; a few of those charges do sound troubling. The problem is that the term "sweatshop" is often used for both voluntary and involuntary conditions. But a couple of those cases do sound like actual coercion was involved. The site you link is hardly without biases, but it sounds like something worth looking into. I rarely set foot in Target anyway, much preferring Wal-Mart. --["RoyWright"] + * Even "voluntary" abuse of labor is bad. And Wal-Mart employs many of the same practices-And then some + * By "voluntary," I mean the workers aren't held at their jobs against their will. If you truly believe that you, from the luxury of Davis, know better than the workers in question whether they should accept a job, then I can only sincerely hope for their sakes that you never gain that kind of power over them. Now, as I said, it seems there may be some genuinely ''in''voluntary labor going on, and if that's the case, it truly is criminal and should be punished. --["RoyWright"] + I don't want that kind of power. Anyway, I've heard plenty of third world workers say that they want better pay, working hours, and such. Some even want workers' control over the factory. --["TobinJones"] + Well, the planning commission met, and I have to say, John Dewes, screw you. It was the standard corporate response, ass-covering, denying, shifting the blame, questioning of sources because they document events that happened two or three years ago. Screw you. You care more about profit than people. We will fight you all the way, you sweatshop owning exploiters. ["TobinJones"] + * Dude. Don't play the sweatshop card. If you're that concerned about illegal sweatshop labor, go shut down the oversea factories yourself. --TR + * "I much prefer Wal-Mart." Is that because they are more shameless about their awful business practices? Just wondering. [AnthonySoto] + * Hey, no worries, your kids will be having to deal with Target's abuse of employees. They'll thank you for the cheap diapers and socks you got in exchange. :) ["JeffWood"] + + ==Right to Build== + Why should the citizens be allowed to decide whether or not a Target is built? Is it really our place to tell Target that they cannot build their complex of stores? I agree that we should not support a target, and boycotts would be something I would take part in and even help organize, but I do not think that it is our place to tell them whether or not they can build a building. I think that the proposition shouldn't have been put on the ballot; the citizens should not make zoning decisions, that's what we elect city officials to do. ["StephenHudson"] + * They could just as easily use an existing building or create an add-on to an existing building than build a completely new one. --TR + * The Planning Commission did reject the zoning change, but the Council chose to do an end-run around their own advisors for reasons of their own by putting it on the ballot. ["JeffWood"] + + ==Other Arguments== + + Stupid lazy lower class people! take the bus to woodland if you like target and walmart and stop with your bitching and endless mindless debates. Do we really need two targets, two walmarts within 10 miles of each other. Quit whining and go ask your parents for enough money to buy a car. Pathetic. You are all transient residents of this community and poor stewards as such. Here is an idea! try stop thinking about your needs for one freaking second and think about what is best for the community you live in. You should know that shitting where you eat is a bad idea, even if you will only be eating here for 4 years. ["DudeNude"] + Please give me a break. You're an embarrassment to all of us who oppose Target. + DudeNude, please show some decency. --TR P.S. Where's the first Target? First Wal-Mart? They're not within 10 miles of me. + + * I'd like to point out that other than the fact that most UC Davis undergrads Graduate in their 5th and 6th years, Students as a population are here to stay, and are an enduring part of the community. We will be here next year, five years from now, and ten after that. And, ["Mike Levy" some] ["Lamar Heystek" of] ["Rob Roy" us] want to stay here and make even more of a difference and help the community for the community members (which include us). In response to "stupid lower class people," because my sarcasm detector has burnt out, I'm going to have to respond seriously: 1.) It isn't just the lower class who are for the target 2.) Why is it that while everyone is Davis seems to support programs for the poor, they don't want to see them (NIMBY)? To "endless mindless debates": 5 of the 13 edits before this were your responses. To "do we need two targets, two walmarts w/in 10 miles of each other": If people do not want to travel the 10 miles, and are passionate enough for another one, then they could say we do need two. I the word 'need' here is too subjective, and varies too much depending on your background, socioeconomic and political. "Quit whining and go ask your parents...buy a car": Some of us are poor, and thusly rely on a large amount of financial aid because we could not otherwise afford to be here. Also, I'd like to make a note of who was whining with the "anonymous" parentheses behind most comments. I've already addressed the transient residents issue, and as for poor stewards, We do not make many decisions, because we are not represented in the city council, because most students feel '''they shouldn't make decisions when they are only here for four years''', and so the cycle continues, and when we do make decisions, which are for the best interests of this significant portion of the community, they are lauded as being selfish and shortsighted. Now, if you, an upstanding member of the community, who presumes to be thinking about what is best for the community, goes in and destroys your credibility of opinion with the line "Stupid lazy lower class people," should I even have spent this effort responding to your ridiculous claims? Oh, and one more thing, please, tell me How you are sure that you know better than I do as to what is best for our community? How can either of us know whats best for something which affects the both of us? PS: Can you check your sarcasm detector, because I'm pretty sure the "Target Rocks" comment was there just to be controversial. Sound familiar?--["MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis] + + Stupid: Building another Target in a small town when there is already one 10 miles away. Stupid: Arguing that we need Target because you are a student and poor. Stupid: Target is a program for the poor. WTF!?!? Stupid: Ignoring the long-term effects of Target on local stores and/or not caring about them because you are a transient member of the community. Stupid: Assuming the students of UC Davis support and/or need target. Yes Micky, the students of UC Davis are an enduring part of the community, but they don't all support Target in Davis. 5-6 years for a 4 year degree is nothing to be proud about either btw, and if that is what keeps you here I suggest focusing on finishing your degree and moving on. (maybe to a town that already has a target. you could even get a job there Micky!) + Lazy: Refusing to drive or take public transportation to the Target in Woodland, if you really HAVE to shop at Target. + * I'm not lazy. I'm busy. I would also rather ride my bike or walk, but not 10+ miles. --TR + Low Class: Anyone that shops at a store like Target to save a buck, while ignoring, or not caring about the injustice, unfair labor practices, and longterm economic implications of supporting corporations such as this. + Oh, please. Not this again. You are not that concerned about the injustice or unfair labor practices if all you do is complain. + * Well smartass, they are closing down the Woodland target. And you missed the main point: it doesn't help Davis not to have a Target. Just last year, Target [http://www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2006/03/14/CityNews/Davis.A.Possible.Target.For.New.Target-1685983.shtml?norewrite200605231042&sourcedomain=www.californiaaggie.com reported] 270,000 purchases with a Davis zipcode. 270,000 is a lot, and that's from the three nearest targets. Gasp! People do go to shop at Target! ''Students and residents in the city who lack a Davis mailing address were omitted from the report, which tracked the income at the three closest Target locations.'' 270,000 purchases, not dollars. Just in tax dollars, thats at least 500k to 800k revenue for the city according to the article. That's a buttload of money Davis is missing out on. I think that many purchases obviously goes FAR beyond just students, and shows that there really is a great demand for Target and its goods. Yeah, it's true people could figure out a way to Sacramento or Vacaville once Woodland closes, and obviously they do. But having a Target is an immediate benefit to Davis, while it's effects on small stores are really questionable. Davis doesn't really have all that much in terms of variety at the ohmygodsogodly mom and pop stores. They also don't seem to be dieing from our other quaint small town mom and pop stores, like Borders/Costplus/Starbucks/Gottschalks/Safeway/Albertsons/Longs/Riteaid/etc. But I'm sure a Target would do the trick, BAM NO MORE DAVIS. + + + Stupid#1: I only have to say that if supply and demand make it so, and part of that is protesting the Target, then however it ends up is how its going to be. I mean, there can't be '''no-one''' who wants the target there, right? And, there has to be someone who would shop there, otherwise they wouldn't have proposed it. So, its your job to protest and not go there, because we want to have some sort of democratic process here. Also, because I hope that these issues are aired in other public forums, there can be a complete view as to what community opinion is. Basically: Is there a market? and What do they want? are my opinions. + Stupid#2: The best justification I can use in terms of Targets prices and being a poor student is that they have less markup, and are more affordable to poor college students, but these are valid arguments from a selfish perspective (aka, i concede the point). + Stupid#3: See point #2 as to the cost, but again, this doesn't take into account the global cost or Stupid#4, and I don't say its a program for the poor, only thing in that area is #2 and slightly increased employment(debatable-- Want stats). + Stupid#4: Disagree over transient member-ness(matter of personal opinion), and I'd like to see a study about the long term effects (though I know they exist to a degree). + Stupid#5: I assume no such thing. I say we (which should be some) are poor, may not have cars, etc, but at no time do I assume students support target. Also, with the 5-6 year thing, thats just a statistic, and I'm just a freshman, who's planning on leaving in 4. Also, statistically, finishing the degree is only one factor that keeps people here 5-6: its having to work, taking advantage of UCDs opportunities, a more laid back culture here, which goes along with heavy club/org involvement, partying, and taking the minimum units per quarter to make Satisfactoy Academic Progress. But I digress. And I'm not going to respond to the ad hominem attack. + Lazy: It all comes down to cost and convenience. You'd be surprised how many people of all backgrounds exhibit these qualities, and how America seems to support these qualities in its populace. Maybe this is just laziness by another name, but it is packaged and sold thoughout the country. Is Davis really that different? + Low class: You'd be surprised how many middle class people do that as well, or do you mean class in terms of "classy" as opposed to economics? Beyond that, some people aren't informed and don't know of the troubles of target, and others it is a choice between a rock and a hard place, with target giving people what they need. We should think about and consider everybody, but traditionally, only the rich or upper-middle class have had that luxury, and if being lower class means looking out for yourself because you can't afford to not shop at Target, then there are even greater problems of inequity in America than just one Target in Davis. What would you be willing to sacrifice for us all to be on equal ground, and not exploiting foreign workers? What have you sacrificed so far? --["MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis] ''PS: I agree with considering the broader implications, but, I'd like to ask you to consider the concepts I pose at the end, which are those of even broader implications than Davis, Ca. I feel they get closer to the root of the matter, but may not be the right thing for a local wiki.'' + This has turned into a really good discussion! My main problem with this issue is people blindly supporting Target out of convenience without understanding the evils that go along with it. This isn't limited to students; as you say America seems to exhibit these qualities in all its populace. It is an endemic problem in this country, and I feel like it is bringing everyone down with it. To be honest, I don't know what to do about it! You are right to some degree in saying that only the upper class can afford to really choose who they buy from. My suggestions here is that maybe we all need to take a hard look at what we really need to survive, and purchase accordingly. Are we really dependent on Target to get the things we need to live, or could we get by with more basic things? Further, are these basic things so expensive elsewhere that we cannot live in Davis without Target? My feeling is that I recognize a need for stores like Target, but I don't want to see them in every single town of the USA, and driving/biking/taking the bus 10 miles to enjoy the Target discount doesn't seem like much of a sacrifice. + The debate over poor people being forced to shop at stores like Target is interesting. You could argue that this is a consequence of Target or Walmart moving into a town and forcing the people to shop there after the local stores close down. The people shop there because the prices are cheap. Are they really getting a good deal when they are buying poor quality goods that will break and won't last? Poor quality goods that are made in places with unfair labor practices that will ultimately undermine the American economy. + As an aside, I find the over-priced-alternative social-conscious-eco-friendly-organic and natural alternatives to be equally as ridiculous. If only rich people have the luxary of making the right decision, then how will this be sustainable or make a difference? + + ==Yes on Target== + + The opportunity is here, and may get shut down if more people don’t speak up to say '''“YES! I want a Target in my town.”''' Don’t leave the decisions up to the nay-sayers… + + + Meanwhile, the Target Corporation is getting serious about moving into Davis, establishing [http://www.targetindavis.com/] to promote their new store. + + '''1. Speak to City Council: June 13''' + '''Public Forum begins around 8pm at ["City Hall"] in the ["City Council Community Chambers" Community Chambers], 23 ["Russell Boulevard" Russell Blvd.] on the corner of 5th & B''' + + Just got back from the meeting (it is currently 3:15 am). I gave my input during public comment time as did many, many others. (To name a few: ["Lamar Heystek"], ["Rob Roy"], owner of ["The Avid Reader"], owner of ["Bizarro World"], mothers, longtime residents, some middle schoolers, etc.) The overwhelming response during public comment time was "NO NO NO Target". All in all: Davis is vehemently opposed to a Target in town. The issue is slated into next week's city council agenda for even further discussion, where fiscal and environmental impact, along w/other concerns, will be discussed. And now, before I become any more incapable of writing a satisfactory report, I will say good evening/good morning and go to sleep. --["Elise Kane"] + + 2. Email your City Officials from ['''http://www.targetindavis.com'''] + + [http://www.targetindavis.com/target_news.wmv Target Debate] + + [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJZHSfzDOg No on Measure K supporter stealing a Target sign.] + + ----- + + ==No on Target== + + [[Image(Dont_Big_Box_Davis_Sign.JPG, right, thumbnail, 300, "Sign in the window of a business ["downtown"]")]] + + On November 7th, Davis residents will vote whether to allow a 137,000 square foot Big-Box (Target) store and four additional unnamed stores comprising 46,000 square feet onto Mace Blvd and 2nd Street, in Mace Ranch. + + This project flies in the face of Davis General Plan that limits retail to 30,000 square feet and specifically calls for neighborhood shopping outside of downtown, not regional. A store of this size will dominate retail and cause store closings downtown and in neighborhood centers. + + The zoning change required will break faith with the Mace Ranch neighborhood. The traffic, pollution and crime that the center will create will affect quality of life throughout Davis. Furthermore, hidden costs to support this development will offset the tax gains Target promised while wooing the City Council. + + Go to [http://www.DontBigBoxDavis.org/] for more information. Keep our city special instead of supporting "me-too" retail sprawl. + + ==Jobs== + + Try asking him about the lowest income wages again. :) I mean, um, there were more Dewes hyjinks tonight. --["JosephBleckman"] + Oh, do tell. --["TobinJones"] + * One of the Councilmen kept asking Dewes what the lowest income wage set could be. Tellingly Dewes answered at first by talking about their benefit package. When asked again he kept glancing back at his boss/comerades while saying that he couldn't answer due to the many different starting types. As he was continued to be grilled into answering the question that was the answer he gave over and over and over again. The man looked enormously flustered. Unfortunately the Councilman running that inquisition gave up rather than forcing him to give a non-B.S. answer. --["JosephBleckman"] + What does how much Target pays have anything to do with this issue anyway? If they treat their employees so badly, THEY will suffer by not getting qualified people working for them. I bet there are plenty of employers in Davis downtown that can hardly compete with Target in terms of pay, benefit, and flexibility. Should we kick them out of Davis? Or would they be afraid that Davis employers can't compete with what Target offers their employees? From job opportunity perspective, there's absolutely nothing negative about having more options in Davis especially in a small town like Davis with tens of thousands of students. If you want to oppose Target, stick to NIMBY or No Big Box in my precious little town theories and don't waste time trying to make it an union/workers' right issue. --["BrianYasmin"] + My concern isn't about the Davis laborers. It's about the workers in Saipan who have been coerced and threatened into working in factories for Target. I don't know that much about Target's first-world practices, but their third world ones are abominable. + It's not a Davis downtown labor issue, but probably for different reasons than you think. If the Target is built, I wager that 80% of the labor force will be minorities from Dixon and Woodland. Why? Because they have a better work ethic and more flexible hours than most students. After all, how many UCD students are willing to put on the Target apron and push carts across the parking lot? How many UCD students will be able to schedule classes so that they can get out to the other side of town to put in 4 hours then come back across town? As to working conditions, I am sure that Target will not treat their employees as well as downtown merchants. I challenge you to go into Ace Hardware or Dibbert Lumber and ask the help if they are going to consider changing jobs to Target. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] + So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["BrianYasmin"] + I said it wasn't* a downtown Davis Labor issue and I didn't say I had a problem with 80% of the workers coming from Dixon and Woodland. Personally, I'd prefer an employer that paid good wages and benefits, but OTOH, if we run all the businesses out of town that pay minimum wage, there wouldn't be a lot of restaurants, hotels and movie theaters left. + Typical. --["TobinJones"] + + And how exactly does a lack of Target keep Davis "special and unique"? Thats BS, there are big box stores here, one more won't kill Davis, since the only possible competition is ACE, another big-box! -["AllisonEriksen"] + * Point of clarification, Davis ACE is a [http://davisace.com/pages/history.cgi locally owned] big-box. -["Users/Pxlated"] + + There are no "big box" stores here by any of the traditional definitions of the term. Davis Ace, which is locally owned (Ace is a retailer coop), is 37,000 sq. ft. "Big Box" usually means 80 - 100,000 sq.ft. +, and not locally owned; i.e., Wal-Mart, Target, CostCo. -["Users/DonShor"] + + ==Considerations== + + A) There are already many places in Davis to buy things like toothpaste, soap, etc. including but not limited to several Safeways, 2 Longs drug stores, 2 Rite-Aid drug stores, two Nugget Stores, and at least a dozen 7-11 type stores (not to mention the COOP). + + B) Cost Plus or the World Trade store or whatever they are calling it now occupies what was an already existing building in the downtown area. + + C) Corporate Stores like Target, Home Depot and other BORGS (as well as most of the smaller chain stores) are playing the "world domination" game, constantly merging, absorbing each other, reorganizing and/or going bankrupt. In the meantime, their goal is to create a string of stores no further apart than 20 miles so that no one has to travel more than ten miles to get to one. + + D) These stores mostly carry crap products which can be sold for less than their higher quality counterparts, creating the illusion of low prices. In addition, because these stores buy in such high volumes, they can dictate how products, even "brand name" products can be packaged, further enhancing this illusion. For example Costco (formerly Price Club) used to sell a case of 24 12 oz. bottles of Martinelli's Sparkling Apple Cider. But at some point, without any "fanfare" those bottles "shrunk" to 10 oz. The package looked the same, was the same size and sold for the same price but the customer was getting 48 oz. less of juice, the equivalent of four of the original 12 oz. bottles. Tactics like this are the standard for these companies so don't be deceived into thinking that by patronizing them, you are getting a better deal. Do the math and you will see what I am talking about. + + E) When OSH opened their Woodland store, there were three independently owned hardware stores in the town including the much loved Cranston Bros. All three disappeared within a year. When Staples opened their store, there were two very good office supply stores which also very quickly went under which, along with the hardware stores, left gaping holes in the downtown that were eventually occupied by mattress stores, el-cheapo furniture outlets and the like. This is already happening in downtown Davis. + + F) None of the major problems we now face are going to be solved without some "sacrifice". Until we stop thinking that everything we want must be within easy reach, we are not going to fix anything. How many times has the argument been made that it is wasteful to have to drive ten miles to Woodland to go the Target Store? Give me a break! It's only ten miles! If you live in West Davis, it will be three miles to a "Mace Ranch" Target and most of that will be "stop and go driving" which will use far more fuel than hopping up to Woodland on 113. And god forbid that you suggest taking the bus or ride sharing! Anyway, even if one is not concerned about fuel waste, it's going to be cheaper to pay five cents more for your toothpaste in Davis than to burn a gallon or more of gas driving to Woodland. + + G) Buying clothing is an issue in Davis but it's not going to be solved by Target. Personally, I think we should be encouraging vendors who are willing to maintain smaller outlets in the downtown. For example, the "Discoveries" building with it's 6,000 sq. ft. could have easily housed a clothing store. So could the old City Hall building which, instead, is now home to yet another "yuppie" bistro. + + H) Ever since the people of this country ceased to be referred to as "the people" and were "re-packaged" as "the consumer", we have been sinking deeper and deeper into the pit. The truth is, we don't need 90% of the crap we buy. We are truly "consuming" with our willingness to play into the hands of the corporate giants by allowing ourselves to be suckered into buying shoddy products that will not last any longer than the pitiful "90 day warranties" we get with them. I for one hate shopping. If I need a pair of pants, I want to buy a pair of pants that is going to last as long as possible, takes a few resources as possible to produce and that I don't have to deal with a herd of giant butts shoving around shopping carts full of Coke and potato chips while listening to Muzak versions of Barry Manilow songs to get. We simply MUST understand that an economy based on consumption and growth is the antithesis of sustainability as are stores like Target. + + I) We keep hearing how the City of Davis needs the tax revenues generated by big stores. But one has to wonder just how much of this money is really needed and how much of it is simply being used to turn Davis into one big strip mall. I refer to the completely unneeded new "cop shop", the ridiculous Pole Line road "improvement" project that resulted in those stupid planter islands full of freeway bush and trees that will only make it harder to see the oncoming traffic, and the most recent fiasco, the phony brick "blurps" that were added to the major downtown intersections which resulted in much more traffic constriction (due to the loss of the "right turn lanes"), difficulty in accessing the four corner parallel parking spaces and an actual net loss of parking spaces. Maybe I could throw in the giant video cameras mounted on top of the "parking snarfer" vehicles. Too hard to reach out there with the chalk stick is it? Is this stuff really needed? I don't think so. I hate to have to be the one to point this out, but this stuff does not represent progress. It is simply represents the ultimate expression of conspicuous consumption, not exactly what a "forward thinking" community like Davis should be promoting. --["DavidDeCristoforo"] + + + The proposed target store is 137,000 sq ft, larger than Wal-Mart in Woodland and the size of 2.4 football fields. The entire project covers 19 acres and includes 46,000 sq ft of other undisclosed retail, but the Target is the heart of the matter. If K passes, this giant Target will be Davis' first Big-Box store. Big-Box means one-stop shopping for low priced, low quality goods; it is always auto-dependent with massive parking lots and freeway access; it provides low wage jobs and promotes sweatshop labor overseas; it is predatory and drives smaller shops out of business; it is the exemplar of rampant sprawl, consumerism and cultural homogenization. Some people are OK with all this as long as Big-Box delivers convenience and price, but a growing number of Davisites find what we are being asked to give up too high a price for cheap socks. + + As mentioned, the Target store alone is 137,000 sq ft; the current limit on retail in Davis is 30,000 sq ft. Making such a huge leap in retail scale disregards our city's General Plan process and endangers current and future retail stores that were designed within the city's standards. With it's tremendous unfair size advantage the Big-Box will cause store closings downtown and in neighborhood centers. Any new retail in Davis will have to meet the new scale, for only Big-Box can compete with Big-Box. With Measure K as precedent, the 52 acres along 2nd street adjacent to this project will be developed without public vote and filled with Lowes, Home Depot, Costco or what have you—who else is going to build next to a Super-Target? At this point, downtown and the small malls will be afflicted with store closings and permanent vacancies. Instead of the consumer "choice" and "convenience" promised we will all have to drive to the freeway for goods we used to get at our neighborhood centers. + Even if there is "only" the one Big-Box, as the Yes on K folks falsely promise ( ask yourself, have you ever seen a Target store surrounded by quiet fields and idyllic grasslands?), that alone will cause massive store closings. Target's own projections for a Davis store's earnings are $60 Million EVERY YEAR. That money has to come from somewhere, namely from established local businesses. With every adjoining community already having Big-Box stores, a Davis Target will not draw regional sales—excepting a few freeway travelers it's sales must come entirely from Davisites. Target is touting the number of credit card sales Davis residents make at outlying Targets as justification of their placement here, but anyone can tell you that Target Corp is not locating in Davis to get sales they already have in Woodland—they have to divert sales from established local business to survive and profit. But how much will be diverted? The National Trust for Historic preservation says that a Big-Box store diverts 80% of its sales from existing local business. Target hired their own firm, CBRichard Ellis to do an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) during the proposal process; CBRE based all their calculations (including the unbelievable and inaccurate sales tax projections) on a 2% diversion rate. So Target is going to come and pluck 98% of $60 Million from thin air every year....besides doing EIRs, CBRE is, uncoincidentally, a major real estate broker for Target Corp. I'm inclined to believe the Historic Preservation folks, but even if a very conservative 50% of targets earnings are diverted, that is still $30 Million every year! Our malls, downtown shops, groceries and pharmacies cannot take that kind of loss. + As Target sells virtually everything including groceries, pharmacy, general merchandise and garden items, many stores will be directly affected. But the draw of customer traffic will threaten even non-competitive, non-retail businesses. Restaurants will struggle as adjacent shops close; malls will lose their anchors and the small shops will follow; every shopping area will suffer as customer traffic is diverted to the freeway. "One-stop shopping" doesn't leave much room, or money, for anyone else. And as the smaller shops close, everything we were promised by Measure K proponents fades away. Consumer choice is gone as Big-Box is our only option for many goods. Convenience is gone as we can no longer walk or bike to Longs or Rite-Aid or ACE, now closed. Sales tax revenue and jobs are gone as the deceased shops produced more in sum than the Big-Box does. Worst of all, Davis' unique character, quality of life and small-town charm is gone, irretrievably. + Proponents of K are dismissing such predictions as dire and unrealistic, yet this is exactly what has happened in every small town across the country that has allowed Big-Box on its periphery. Visit downtown Woodland, Vacaville or Fairfield if you want to see Big-Box blight in evidence. That Big-Box diverts sales and closes small businesses is such an accepted fact within our culture that The Simpsons and Family Guy make fun of it; does Target really think they can spend enough money to refute common knowledge? Apparently so, as Pro-Kers also like to claim that their Big-Box mall with its 19 acres of pavement and 10.000 additional car trips A DAY to sell landfill-clogging disposable goods produced without environmental restrictions half a world away and transported here by the cheapest, most polluting methods is somehow "Green". Please. An environmentally sound Big-Box mall is like a healthy meal at McDonalds. Like Target, PG&E is now posing as "Green" to influence the H&I vote. How gullible do they think we are? + The Yes on K campaign's signs say "I LOVE Target". Well, I don't hate or love Target and I know that Target Corporation doesn't love me. Like any corporation, they exist only for the bottom line of profit and see us as potential dollars, nothing more. I do however, Love Davis. I grew up here, went to school here, graduated UCD, started my own small business downtown, bought a home on Pole Line Rd and I am raising my son here. I Love Davis for it's small town feel, our sense of community, it's environmentalism and bike-friendliness, the sense of security and Davis' unique character. A massive Big-Box freeway mall is entirely inconsistent with this and puts it all at risk. MEASURE K will change the face of Davis, universally for the worse. Preserve our community. Vote NO on K. + + ----- + + One of these Meassure K activists (pro? con? I don't care) sent an automatic-dialer poll to my cell phone. Isn't that against some law of some sort? -- ["MichaelGiardina"] + + It might have sounded automatic because of the tone of the voice of the speaker. After calling a few hundred people the activist will start to speak more automatically in the phone. I can tell you that the Yes on Measure K do not do automatic calls and I think it is against the law in certain circumstances. --["SteveOstrowski"] + + No on K has never done a phone poll. I can guarantee you of this because I'm the treasurer of the campaign and we don't have that kind of money. Ye$ on K are the only people doing polling right now for this measure. There are two donors to the Ye$ on K campaign (I'm sure you can guess the first one) Target and Ziegler Associates for a total of $30,100. As of 9/30/2006, Ye$ on K has racked up $120,000 in unpaid bills (see dontbigboxdavis.org for reports). No on K has over 250 donors and $18,000 in total donations all from community members and The ["Sierra Club"]. In addition, if Ye$ on K is so "Green" why is The Sierra Club endorsing NO on K?! Also if they are so "Go Green!" why are they waisting fossil fuels by driving trucks around with billboards. The only "Green" I see here is the money that Target will be making and sending to Minneapolis. -DebWestergaard + + I know first hand that Yes on Measure K people will send voice mails that may sound like a computer because on occasion I sound like a computer or automatic message. Also I would like to point out that the Sierra Club will never be satisfied until all human construction is at a halt. This Target store is only one of a very few selected by LEED and if this building is environmentally unsound then all are. --["SteveOstrowski"] + + You don't get "selected" by LEED. It's a certification level. There are 4 levels of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) that exist and Target is offering to build the lowest and minimum level (Certified). If UC Merced can build an entire campus of "Silver" level LEED, then a multimillion dollar corporation can definitely afford to build the highest level as well. I see you're a Christian Democratic Party Speaker and it's truly ironic that you support Target. Since 2004, Target has given $100,000 to Citizens to Save California, which worked to qualify the governor's initiatives for the special election ballot, and $210,000 to the governor's California Recovery Team, which supports Schwarzenegger's political aims. Target also spent $250,000 to back a referendum that erased a law that would have required many California businesses to provide health care for their workers, and $100,000 to the California Business Properties Association, another of Schwarzenegger's backers. [http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/23/BAGDKEBPA71.DTL] BTW, that's Greenpeace not Sierra Club that wants human construction halted ;-) Just as a friendly note, please check into all the facts not just convenient ones before posting about this very important proposal. -DebWestergaard + + Target is supported by a great many Christians in the Davis area and I know first hand the generosity of Target stores to Christian and secular charities and projects. You seem to imply that the governor's proposals are not Christian in which case I would like to explore those reasons on another forum. I do not believe that Target is a Christian issue other than the fact that many Christian students and families do support Target and as such I would like Measure K to pass. Also it should be noticed that the high ranking officials of LEAD and Student Focus are also for Target passing. --["SteveOstrowski"] + * Clearly Target exists to build churches and homeless shelters - I am sure it is not done for public relations to do one upmanship on WalMart in the slightest. Also, after much thought, I am going to refrain from criticizing you using peer pressure as your central argument to support this legislation. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] + + A bit off "target" here [snicker], but I'd like to qualify the Sierra Club comments; the group was pretty vehemently opposed to just about every proposed dog park site including one pre-approved by the City five years earlier. While I can't say that they want "all human construction halted," this is one former environmentalist who has found Sierra Club to be a bit over-zealous in protecting land from virtually all uses aside from birding. --["AlphaDog"] + + I returned home one day from a friend's house to find a "Yes on K" sign on my lawn, which was put up without my permission. I live on Anderson and I've been told that my lawn is a great advertising space. I just think it is really classy to put a sign on someone's private property without their permission. --["EnirytManaen"] + + If I see any of you anti-Target people there shopping for so much as a battery, I'm calling the police. It's like the vegans who wear leather belts and give you the "It's already dead and I'm not wasteful" excuse. It's like being a militant athiest then banging on the gates of heaven with tears in your eyes. It's like shaving your head and getting an SS tattoo, then seeing a hot Jew. You're gonna be bummed out when you need a tubesock. -- ["JoshFernandez"] + * Target doesn't sell socks in my size. I have to drive (horror) to Sacramento to find a place for clothes. Target doesn't meet my needs in this regard. Is that fair? -- ["JeffWood"] + + -- Fair that you have freakishly big/small feet? Hm. Probably not. + + For the love of god, someone make an "I <3 Child Labor" sign to put around town. We need them to defeat this unquestioning senseless corporate jingoism. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] + + The proposed Target in Davis has nothing to do with other corporate practices in Third World countries. That's like saying that every employee of Target is somehow supportive of child labor. --["SteveOstrowski"] + + * Oh give me a break. I think their "I heart Target, oh boy! Gush with happiness lolz!1" signs are completely ridiculous. I am trying to mock their campaign practices with analysis of the production process. You don't claim to love the environment and steamroll fields with asphalt and erect large shopping centers. Come on. I'm just waiting for Westfield to buy it out... -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] + + I am not against the idea of having a Target store in Davis. I am against the idea of having a 137,000 square foot Target store in Davis. I recognize that Davis residents need some of the things that Target can provide, and I also recognize that a lot of tax revenue bleeds to other cities when people have to go elsewhere to get these items. But that doesn't mean we need to start bringing in overly-huge megastores. We have successfully integrated many reasonably-sized chain stores in Davis -- Cost Plus, Borders, Dollar Tree, etc... I would much rather see a reasonably-sized (eg. 80,000 sq ft) Target with a couple of smaller stores next to it than an enormous Target with only one other store. I will be voting NO on K. --["AlexPomeranz"] + + Well the deal is that if this fails other corporate stores will not want to run the chance of trying to enter Davis and it will be years before Target or other stores will try. Also your argument is about size, a store that is on the eastern side not hurting anyone within most of the city. Bigger size means more products and more availability. It's like you can't say that I will disapprove of this large store but approve of another smaller one. This is it, whether or not to have a Target in Davis, not a debate over it's size. The debate over its size was dealt with a long time ago when the city send this development to the voters. --["SteveOstrowski"] + * Why can't you say that? It makes sense, especially in the context he uses. + * Other corporate stores will not enter Davis? I hate having to travel to East Bay to go to Albertsons, Safeway, The dollar store, Rite-Aid, Cost Plus Worldmart, or a liquidating tower records. Traversing the causeway for a McDonald's, an In-N-Out, a KFC, a Dairy Queen, or an AM/PM has taken a toll on me. + In those 2 Safeways, Nuggets, Rite-Aids, Longs and Albertsons that I have imagined existing here in Davis, I have envisioned an entire aisle dedicated to soda and another to chips. I dream of a Safeway that dedicates more shelf space to the Coca-Cola Company then to all of Africa, India, and the Middle East combined. I dream of a Davis where local character and flair, diversity and the dreams, intrigue and uniqueness are lost because we offer the exact same on streets with different names then the next town over. + + Culture is married to diversity and their souls have been stolen by the Targets and Walmarts of our day. The acts that shape you as an individual are actively being traded out for conformity by those that pander to the lowest common denominator. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- + ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] + + I like to look at th 3 smaller keywords on the campaign signs + + preserve our community, neighborhoods and downtown Vs. Choice. Funds for davis and sustainability + + funds for davis is $2 per person, not that great in the grand scheme of things, choice on where to shop? go down poleline and go to that target when the close the CFM location to move it next to the costco that will be there. + Can someone tell me what sustainability means in the sense of target, that it won't close? + My first instinct was to vote against it and I'm not going to second guess myself. Even if target panders to Davis with it's leed building --["StevenDaubert"] + oh and howcome the council still pushes the issue on the voters when all the committes save the development one disprove of the idea? + I look at people on the don't big box site and I see Sue Greenwald, Julie Partansky, Ken Wagstaff, Mike Harrington, Stan Forbes and Lamar Heystek. All these people represent the values that I see in Davis and have been demonstrating there view thru politics for some time. I would trust them quicker then I would trust Puntillo. + + -- I believe that the K/Target measure has been thoroughly greenwashed. Some of the components of the LEED certification are already required by the city, and the outskirt position of the store virtually mandates driving there anyway. The debate has been framed around whether or not this Target will be energy efficient, which it will - more so than almost all "big-box" stores. (As long as the thermostat is kept under tight control. The pro-K folks also had no idea whether something so simple such as skylights would be installed.) I particularly favor the prospect of showers for bicyclists, as someone who once rode 6 miles for a summer hardware store job. The environmental impact will not be significant, due in part to the large buffer zone they will be creating, when compared with what otherwise might be built there. Many Davisites would agree that this particular store will be better, environmentally, than most cities are being offered, and so if you agree that LEED certification is good, then it seems that the argument for Target is over? Wrong. + + This is one of the things about greenwashing - the debate has been framed around what is not the most important aspect of the Measure K issue. I believe that the strongest argument against Target is the economic one. I took some time to interview the (paid) pro-K and (volunteer) anti-K advocates at the Farmer's Market, and after inquiring about the details of the environmental arguments, I brought up the economic arguments, suggesting that they were stronger. The Pro-K folks tell us that it will bring tax revenue to the city of Davis, and in the short run there is no doubt that it will, but will it have a long-term negative or positive effect? Large retailers that don't pay their workers a living wage drain city services. It is certain that in the short-term, Davis will enjoy extra tax revenues, but where will these come from? + + We're being told that the new Target will not put locals out of business, that instead, the green Target will be Davisites that have already been shopping at the Target in Woodland. It is argued that Davis ''should'' get these tax revenues. It follows logically that if these people are no longer shopping at the Woodland Target, then building a Target in Davis should pull revenues out of Woodland. I asked the pro-K advocate at the market a direct question about this - that if the tax revenue is coming from shoppers that would have gone to Woodland otherwise, then doesn't that mean that this would have a negative effect on Woodland? He was evasive and said that we can't know that for sure. (Therefore, you can't know for sure that there would be a positive effect on Davis) + + It's simple math. If you add tax revenues to Davis that are from people no longer shopping in Woodland, then you have to be subtracting those tax revenues from Woodland. And unless you are paid to obfuscate on a simple question, there should be no problem with admitting that. The Woodland Target is on the chopping block as well, as they hope to build a bigger one on I-5, in addition to the one in Davis. (No other Target will be LEED-certified like the one in Davis. That puts a dollop of brown ink in the buckets of green paint used in the campaign.) The point is, Target is setting one city against another in a war over each other's tax revenues, and is playing the hero that will bring city tax income relief, until they have statistics on neighboring cities purchasing in their stores. Next might be Dixon, and they may tell Dixon that Davis doesn't deserve the tax revenues that they currently promise us - and so once the Davis store is in place they will forget loyalties as they have announced they will do to Woodland. I think we need to frame this issue in the context of the longer term. Measure K is a clear attempt to get around the general plan that Davis has put together, and doesn't take into account the long term effects on this community and others around them. The arguments being made are written up in terms of carbon dioxide emissions rather than the economic issues that make considering a Target-type store different from any other store. + + A Target in Davis will not ruin the town, nor does Davis meet all of the needs of its citizens with the available stores. But the desire to meet everyone's needs does not automatically mean that Targets and Wal-Marts should move in. We should be thinking about how we can encourage more stores that would meet those needs without going against the general plan - my home town of Petaluma is busy revitalizing its interior rather than just building a bunch of giant stores. And Davisites could think about being a little more inventive with their shopping. Once you realize that those Target and Wal-Mart towels and tube-socks fall apart quickly, you'll see that you aren't saving yourself any money in the process. Thrift Stores are a great way to add interesting and sometimes (paradoxically) long-lasting clothing items to your wardrobe. You could always shop in town, or plan a carpooled trip to Woodland to shop at all the thrift stores on Main Street, and pop over to the Target on Gibson for whatever you're missing. You might also want to consider whether you're truly saving money or being [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader manipulated.] Target expects to make quite a bit of money, [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2006/10/31/news/061new1.txt take a look at this.] + + I have less than a year left in this town, nevertheless I fell obligated to vote no on K because I don't think it will help Davis or its citizens in the long run. The environmental argument is the weakest argument for the new Target, and it is telling that the pro-K campaign decided to make that part of the central slogan (I Heart Green), when the economic issues are more pertinent. The fact that they won't do simple math that follows logically from their central economic arguments suggests to me that the Target company would like us to believe that shoppers, taxes, and income just pop out of nowhere as if by magic, and don't affect anyone except for increasing tax revenues. I decided to look into the measure K issue at first because of the environmental arguments being made, but I realized that they were a distraction. Davis is a town full of very smart people, and I don't think they they'd be fooled for a minute that this is really about the environment. + + The real true winner of the Measure K debate, however, was ["Choice Voting" Davis Choice Voting]. While I spent over an hour talking to both pro and anti-K, they offered me a chair. Something tells me no one expected anyone to want to stop and flesh out the details for or against K. Measure L is now the only ad on my lawn. + Thanks for reading and voting. -["KarlMogel"]

Target Debate

rickrolled — 2008-04-01 11:32:28

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
- [[Image(proposed_target.JPG, right, thumbnail, 400, "Sign located at the proposed site")]]	+ wikispot has been pwned. happy april 1st.
Line 3:	Line 3:
- '''The proposed location of ["Target"] in Davis will be at a location known as ["Second Street Crossing"].'''	+ Papa I know you're going to be upset + 'Cause I was always your little girl + But you should know by now + I'm not a baby
Line 5:	Line 8:
- [[TableOfContents]]	+ You always taught me right from wrong + I need your help, daddy please be strong + I may be young at heart + But I know what I'm saying
Line 7:	Line 13:
- ==Small Town==	+ The one you warned me all about + The one you said I could do without + We're in an awful mess, and I don't mean maybe - please
Line 9:	Line 17:
- I love how Davis is small, and I can get anywhere without driving, but it is missing something essential: a store worth shopping at. Aside from grocery shopping, which I do mostly at albertsons for the convenience of the self checkout, I usually have to go out of town if I need something. Sure, I could probably find it somewhere in town, but it would either be from a large chain with huge markups, or a mom & pop's that seems intent on screwing me in the ass for some reason. I'm not poor, in the derogatory sense people use it around here, but I live on a budget, and paying an extra few dollars for every item I buy just doesn't make sense. At the same time, I don't feel good going to woodland or dixon every time I need something. This new Target could alleviate that. I understand the sympathy for local businesses, but if you need to have no competition to succeed, there may be something wrong with your business model. That is all. - GarrettTiemann	+ Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep + Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep + But I made up my mind, I'm keeping my baby, oh + I'm gonna keep my baby, mmm...
Line 11:	Line 22:
- I don't want a big box store in Davis. It kills the whole idea of being a "small town". - RaynatoCastro - * Right... that's why Folsom, which is still a small town, has a Target, Wal-Mart, Kohls, WinCo, had a Food Source and a former K-Mart where the Kohls is. Oh, and I completely forgot to mention Borders, Home Depot, and CostCo. --TR	+ He says that he's going to marry me + We can raise a little family + Maybe we'll be all right + It's a sacrifice
Line 14:	Line 27:
- Well, ever since they put in Cost Plus, that whole idea is out the door. And plus a Target out by 24-hour would be an area that would not be in the middle of town. And also, Davis is not actually small. It has too few stores to serve its population that exceeds 50,000. - JaimeRaba	+ But my friends keep telling me to give it up + Saying I'm too young, I ought to live it up + What I need right now is some good advice, please
Line 16:	Line 31:
- While Cost Plus is a chain, they pander to the inner-yuppie in us all. Target is where poor people shop, shesh. - PhilipNeustrom	+ Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep + Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep + But I made up my mind, I'm keeping my baby, oh + I'm gonna keep my baby, mmm... + Daddy, daddy if you could only see + Just how good he's been treating me + You'd give us your blessing right now + 'Cause we are in love, we are in love, so please
Line 18:	Line 40:
- "Poor People" do not shop at Target. Shopping at stores like this is a way for people to save $$$. To say that they are "poor" for doing so, is just plain ignorant. I go where I need to to get what I need without wasting $$$. This is how I keep from being "poor". - Aaron.Curtin	+ Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep + Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep + But I made up my mind, I'm keeping my baby, oh + I'm gonna keep my baby, mmm... + Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep + Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep
Line 20:	Line 47:
- What do you mean davis has too few stores to serve its population? People have enough crap as it is. - MarieHuynh	+ Papa don't preach, I'm in trouble deep + Papa don't preach, I've been losing sleep + But I made up my mind, I'm keeping my baby, oh + I'm gonna keep my baby, mmm...
Line 22:	Line 52:
- Target will come. Cars/trucks/SUVs returning home from bay area jobs to Sacramento will follow. The city of Davis will get property taxes. Smaller more locally owned businesses will disappear. Davis residents will purchase heaps of things at amiable prices. Target execs will get rich. Target employees will pay rent, own a used car, and have barbecues. Third world exploitation will continue at a violent rate. Local and global environments will be degraded. Life will go on along its socially, economically, and environmentally unsustainable trajectory towards some sort of collapse. Charge! - - ==Mace Ranch== - - I find it wonderfully ironic that people in Mace Ranch are concerned about their quality of life being adversely affected by the building of a Target when they live in what is easily the ugliest, most unwanted development ever to be foisted on the city of Davis. I only wish it were a Walmart or something even more heinous - an adult superstore, prison, feedlot, - something like that. PaulThober - I agree. -["NickSchmalenberger"] - - Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.--["GrumpyoldGeek"] - - Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] - - Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predecessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly development forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"] - - Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? --["GrumpyoldGeek"] - - The only way you could apply some hypocracy to Mace Ranch residents is if they were Davis residents before Mace Ranch was built, supported the development of Mace Ranch, moved to Mace Ranch, and now do not support Target. I think those individuals are few and far between. What you have are residents of Davis whose first homes were in Mace Ranch. They weren't here for the growth debate. Mr Thober, I'm not sure what you expected people to do- not move into Mace Ranch? Create a nation-wide boycott to stop anyone from purchasing a home in Mace Ranch? Target would be a useful store in Davis, but its location is less than satisfactory. ["JimSchwab"] - I am one of those people who lived in Davis, moved to Mace Ranch, and do not support Target at this location and the poorly designed and community-ill-fitting imposement of a store. Personally, it might work better out by Wildhorse or the hospital where it can better serve the central Davis core, than the freeway impulse-stoppers. --["JeffWood"] - - ==Stuff to Buy== - - I could use a target right now. People need their reasonably priced tube socks, towels, toothpaste, deodorant, etc. - JaimeRaba - - People have to drive (burning fuel) to Woodland, Sacramento or Vacaville to obtain things that people need on a daily basis at a reasonable price. It is in fact what people do, so why not spare the air and put in some establishments that will keep tax revenues in our cash-strapped county? - JaimeRaba - * Agreed --TR - - BAHAHAHAHAHAHA... the truly cash strapped should stop wasting money on the car and BIKE more often. Then they'll have more money to buy stuff they really need. Anyone who can afford a car can afford the basic necessities. Target has a lot of JUNK. Those are not necessary to keep one alive. We have stores that sell food and they usually have other basic things people need. I have no car and do not go to Target but am still alive and well. Let those that can afford extra junk go the little bit of extra distance. Besides, Yolo County includes Woodland and West Sac - MarieHuynh - - No. See, by cash strapped county, I mean Yolo County has difficulty providing social services because it has a big population and not a big tax base. So they raise money primarily through taxing business. I think Prop 13 also negatively impacts this, because it sort of takes property taxes out of the mix. So, West Sacramento and Woodland's increasing amount of industrial complexes do provide somewhat of a tax basis, but then again they also have a lion's share of financial need. And one thing that is absolutely clear is that Davis students ALREADY go outside the county for their major purchases. So instead of spending money in Davis at the places openly criticized as being too expensive, they go elsewhere. And these are places you cannot bike to. Davis ALREADY has a big set of box stores that nobody really thinks of. In addition to the Cost Plus that mars the dorm-centric area of Davis, Davis also has several "box" car dealerships and "box" gyms and "box" auto repair shops. I think if one of these boxes (preferably in the mace/chiles area) held a store that would be more profitable to the inhabitants of Davis in terms of tax revenue and maybe actually giving them some value-priced merchandise, it would beneficial to all. -jr - When I think of major purchases, I think of computers, cars, and houses. I'd rather not have people buy lots of crap here or anywhere else, period. We don't NEED it. I don't care if it's cheap. And I really don't understand why students go and pay for memberships to gyms when they have a brand spanking new ARC. - MarieHuynh - Marie Huynh- People can buy whatever they feel like buying regardless if they NEED it or WANT it. If you are so insensed on people buying only what they need, I am sure multiple computers, pets, etc. also falls under the category of stuff "we don't need". Your opinions seem to only apply to what you think of others and not yourself. As for the Target issue, a couple "big box" stores will not hurt the so-called "small-town" appeal of Davis. Target is a matter of convience for cheap stuff. However, with the addition of more stores such as Walmart, Sams Club, Home Depot, etc. the balance between local business and large-scale retailers will negatively impact the small stores. - AshleyOrsaba - People need food, soap, shampoo, toothpaste, clothing, etc. That's what I'm talking about. That's what I'm talking about. And they waste tons of money buying it in Davis. In fact, I think the reason why students eat out so much, is because the supermarkets' mark-ups are so high. And if you need to buy a can opener? What do you do? You buy it at a 1000% markup at Safeway or Riteaid. It's not good. As far as gym membership, I think it's mostly people who don't have access to the ARC, or those who need 24-hour gym acess. Hey, you didn't even know there was a 24-Hour Fitness! - jr - - Yes, most people eat out at restaurants because Safeway is so expensive. That logic is so crystal clear that I think I will request that UCD give you an honorary degree. And can opener? Ever hear of Ace Hardware? I hadn't - that is why I got flogged at Rite Aid for $2.50. I so wish I had a Target-like store that sells them off at 22 cents each because I find myself needing to add one to my shiny collection nearly every week! But 4realz - Ace has almost everything that Target does and it's downtown. Get over it! - - - Just think!! Soon there will be a big box store in every town in America! What beauty! We can get all of our food, unneeded consumer goods, clothes, and anything else we even slightly desire under one big roof. Hear that - - ==Local Business== - - that is all the workers in free trade zones who made this stuff so happy that we are buying and buying that cheer in the back ground, that’s the sound of Target shareholders jumping for joy while Mom and Pop shops close in Davis. Oh convenience that is just what we need that will make things so much easier for US!!! This community does not need this place their stuff is cheaper because it is easier for big box stores to flood markets, get goods cheaper, while ignoring the people who made them, other local businesses, and the community they ‘serve’. Have it your way - - we’ll stop by Starbucks to get some coffee and get McDonalds on the way home from Target k?? Your cheap sox are well worth all of the environmental degradation, cheap abused labor from all over SE Asia, Africa, and the Americas, and the sadness of decades old mom and pop shops closing in ever town in the US. How convenient! - Okay, this really needs to be on its own page by now. However, a few thoughts. I agree that people are consumeristic to disgusting proportions. But you can't BOTH say that "hey waste fuel and drive to woodland," but also don't build a target nearby because of how it causes 3rd world countries to underpay and otherwise exploit their employees. Pick one. The fact of the matter is that Davis is a town that sells a lot of trinkets ("gifts!"), food and little else... there's really no DIRECT competition with Target. Their biggest direct competition would be with big chains like Rite Aid and Longs (and Grocery stores to some extent)-- didn't you notice? Davisites "import" just about everything. Target is a much better choice than Walmart because they tend to care a bit more about impact upon 3rd world countries--as well as greater selectivity in choosing its merchandise. They're not perfect however. But I think Target would be a good fit for Davis. But it just needs to be put in the right spot. --JaimeRaba - - Hey.. Better Target then Walmart. Either way, I think we could use some large all-purpose store. I don't have a car; I'm not biking over to Woodland, Dixon, or Vacaville to buy clothing. The "Mom and Pop" stores simply don't provide men's clothing. Gap? You have to be kidding me. Think I'm going to pay a ridiculous price for a label? Personally, I root for a Costco; good employee benefits and good prices. - - What about using target.com for socks if you feel you must have cheap ones and not burning gas or forcing davis to have a big box? - If you buy it from target.com you have to sign up and give them personal information. Then you have to pay extra for shipping. And gas is still burned by someone. UPS is burning gas to deliver the socks to your house. Most importantly, neither Yolo County nor the City of Davis recive any tax revenue. When people travel to Woodland, their tax dollars go to the city of Woodland. When people travel to Dixon, their tax dollars go to Dixon and Solano County. - ArlenAbraham - - Putting a Target in Davis would put a lot of the local stores that supply similar goods out of business, namely mom and pops like Ace Hardware, Longs Drugs, The Gap and Office Max. ["LeightonHinkley"] - - * My sarcasm detector just flew right off the scale on that one. At least, I hope its sarcasm. - AlexGarbutt - - Target rocks. Who gives a crap if local businesses go out of business. if they can't compete with a bulk goods store, then obviously they have nothing worthwhile to contribute to Davis except overpriced crap. Target donates money to local schools too. Think of the children. ["ApolloStumpy"] - * Rediculous. I dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at ridiculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they weren't planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["MattHh"] - * Who in their right mind goes grocery shopping at Target? I imagine it would be convenient, if your diet consisted largely of Snackwells and string cheese...and if that was the case, your life expectancy would probably precede the Second Street Crossing completion date. ["LeightonHinkley"] - * Many Targets (and most non-Californian Walmarts) have a separate section that it a full supermarket, roughly similar to Safeway, complete with deli, bakery, butcher and produce section and row upon row of everything from apple chips to frozen waffles. They are ''not'' mini supermarkets, but rather large, full service supermarkets with sprouts, fresh herbs, a variety of imported cheeses, seafood, a full selection of soups and sauces, etc. Of course, this one is a pretty small store (compared to the national sizes), so I can't say it will have such a grocery inside it. But it isn't likely the "Snackwells and string cheese aisle" you're picturing. --["JabberWokky"] - - AS: (think of your children when they are working in a sweatshop owned by China jackass) DudeNude - - Um....maybe the people who work for the local businesses, the people who shop at the local businesses, and the people who OWN the local businesses? You try working for Target, I can tell you first hand that it wouldn't be nearly as nice as working for a small independent business. -- BonnieStewart - - Well, if a target comes to town, then fine. Davis has been screaming about the potential death of downtown for years. Borders was going to do it, Cost Plus was going to do it, etc... It seems to be the rallying cry. "Save our downtown with its pricey boutique shops that students rarely visit." Then they wonder about sales tax leakage. Davis is no longer the small college town it once was. In other news, I saw a sign on Road 102 near Interstate 5 in Woodland stating that they would be opening a Costco and Target at that location. So the mall target will probably close down when that happens. -RogerClark - - I would be completely against a target, if it didn't have a niche in this market. Some things don't need to be high quality, they can just be cheap. Unfortunately there's nowhere in Davis that gets nowhere near this kind of goods. Ace gets close, and the products are high quality, but generally a good deal more expensive. My concerns about these businesses are less their global effect, eventually their business practices will turn around and bite them in the ass as places unionize, but more the damage they do to American communities. 10 years ago, a target would have been awful in davis, and would have retarded severely the growth of downtown. Today though, Downtown is a different place, and can stand independent of the cheap wares of target. I would rather shop at a local business, but unless one can fill the niche that target is filling, I don't see why capitalism can't just take it's course here. Char George - - I am still undecided about whether or not I would want a Target in Davis. I think that it would dramatically change the town, and may create a "broken window" effect that would make it easier for other big box stores to come to town. I really don't want this to happen. On the other hand, I think that Davis is losing a lot of tax revenue from people who go to stores like Target in other towns. My biggest gripe is the cost of clothing currently available in Davis. Last night I was walking around places downtown and it almost put me over the edge. All the clothing stores in town other than Gottschalks are "Boutiques" that sell only $90 tank tops and $300 jeans. I understand that the Naked Thread is all organic or sustainable, therefore worth their price, but at most of these places, the only reason behind the price is the brand. It's ridiculous. Also, most stores in Davis don't sell my size (XL-XXL). Whether it's at Target or not, I'd love to be able to shop for clothes in Davis and find something in my size that I can actually afford. -Janelle - - One thing people need to realize is that there currently is a limit to how large a retailer can have their store in Davis. I believe it is somewhere around 30,000 square feet. To make it worth their while, Target would require approximately 100,000 square feet. If Target does get built, laws that had prevented previous big box outlets from coming in will essentially be null. Regardless whether you are in favor of Target being built, I'm sure that we can agree that we don't need a Wal-Mart, K-mart, and Kohls. Repealing the law will make it infinitely more difficult to do so. - - Allowing Target to be built will prove problematic. What if they were to rework their store somewhere along the lines of what Ace has done?-JustinLanska - - ==Travel and Distance== - - You know all i got to say is that the Target Corp moving to davis is a horrible idea. there are 3 Targets within 18 miles of downtown Davis. They are probably going to close the Woodland one soon (Woodland Democract said that)... Have you thought about what that is going to do to the people who depend on those jobs... are you now going to be happy cause you can buy your crappy free trade imported crap and cheap process so someone making not even a living wage can drive form woodland, davis, west sac, dixon or somewhere else and sell it to you. their labor practices are horrible. they are building it next to a god damn EPA Superfund site. that's right, we can now buy some crappy crap right next to one of the most toxic clean up sites for a hundred mile radius. Big box stores suck, and if you went to the city council meetings, you woudl know that the tax revenue that we would get from the TArget does not add up because of increase in law enforcement, zoneing changes, etc... we would make between 40,-70,000 dollars as a city, which means nothing with the ammount of new traffic lights, cops, security, and cultural lameness that comes along with a Target. People need jobs, but not ones that keep you down, selling crap, not having medical or dental (full time only and they limit the number of those), and NO living wage. Think about what you REALLY need, WHERE all the imported consumer crap (all that GMO and corporate food and plants too) comes from, and if this is something that will actually benefit us as a town or community in any way... by the way if you need a can opener, borrow a neighbors or go to ace, or use a knife. don't be lazy, be creative... - ["CompostNolan" blessings...] - * CompostNolan: Again, people need shampoo and tubesocks outside the 1000% markup. And I can understand that you're a big fan of people burning fuel to go to "close" places such as Woodland's "Mall" Target. There are very few employers in Davis who provide good benefits. However, there are very many stores who sell cheap crap at huge markups. At least Target's markups less ruthless. I know there are many people who think a Target would be a losing proposition in terms of resources for the city. That's why I think the Target would do better out by Mace and Chiles rather than the proposed site. However, I also think the Proposed site would not cause a horrible amount of infrastructural nightmares for Davis, because, essentially, nothing is on 2nd street except "Box stores" containing gyms and other random things. And frankly, I think it's a bit whimsical to think that Targets require increased police presence. There are shoplifters everywhere. Target isn't going to draw in out-of-Davisers, since the Vacaville, Sacramento, and Woodland locations are close enough for essentially all outlying areas. The goods that people in Davis deserve are a long commute away. What ''some'' people seem to fail to realize is that ''people already go to Target'', and that people have a constant need for things that are sold there, and that people are being ripped off in Davis. OR, we could try and buy tubesocks at Ace. Great idea. - * 10 miles to Woodland is a long way for people on bicycles, and Yolobus requires careful planning to make a trip -- ["KenBloom"] - (your story makes me cry) ["DudeNude"] - this is a poor argument. first of all most places in davis are several miles away from the davis proposed target location. if you live in north davis the davis location will actually be slower to get to than the woodland location (according to mapquest). first of all a lot of people working at target would take the bus from woodland (no added pollution). also since the target is now in town, people will no longer do the occassional bulk buying trip (saving time and gas). now people will go to target every month or several times a month for that matter, actually this increases the polution because most of these people will be driving cars for 5 miles or so. how many people are going to seriously bike merchandise from target. i rairly see anyone doing that from a safeway thats only 1 mile or less away. - * Let's see... it makes much sense for me to bike or walk 10+ miles to the nearest Wal-Mart or Target, then carry, say 3 bags worth of necessities back 10 more miles on my bike. Yup, a Target in Davis is SUCH a bad thing... - - * Is going to the Yolobus stop on Covell and taking the bus directly to a Target shopping center on Gibson in Woodland really that hard? -- ["BonnieStewart"] - * No, but it is inconvenient. --TR - * Why don't you try it yourself? It only takes about 2 hours round-trip (minimum)? Two hours you say? Yes. The 42 leaves at the half and gets there around 25 minutes later where you must spend the next hour shopping because that is when the next bus arrives. Only need to grab a couple items? Tough, you gotta wait. Need a little more than an hour? Maybe 10 extra minutes? Well, then better plan to browse the aisles for the remainder of that hour. Add 30 minutes for the ride back to Davis and you're set. Thankfully the Yolo bus is free for students...otherwise I'd seriously consider resorting to using the Aggie newspaper the next time I run out of toilet paper...or you can do as some of my friends do: raid university bathrooms. What's that? There's a Rite Aid you say? Yes, the same Rite Aid that made a killing off of coat hangers (ONLY $3.50 a dozen) when I moved into the freshman dorms. To all you bandwagon jumpers that say a Target is bad...consider this: Students are forced to either be ripped off in Davis or take bus/commute regularly to Woodland/Vacaville for necessities at fair prices. If anything, my experience in Davis has changed my heinous view of Walmart. What Davis student could possibly need a $800 bed (offered downtown!) when a $80 futon from Walmart could do? Walmart was there for me when I needed to furnish my room on a student budget. As a "town" that prides itself in being a college-town the needs of its students should not be taken lightly. --Senioritis - - I will admit to being underslept (my bed deflated last night), but I will share an anecdote about going to Target by Yolobus. I don't have a car, and I needed to buy an air mattress today (and didn't want to pay what my other chainstore option Big 5 would charge, which was $20 more). And going to Target by Yolobus turns a minor errand into a 2-hour errand, since the schedule is such that you're going to be in Woodland for about 70 minutes, whether or not you want to. This wasn't much fun. I'm sure it's very easy for folks with cars to take them to Woodland, and my errand would have been about 40 minutes (drive, buy single item, leave). But 2 hours is a bit much. -dan brown - - Dan, an air mattress is a perfect example of disposable, wasteful consumerism. I've been there, and I know it is cheaper than buying a real mattress, but they don't last! Buy a real mattress, or a futon! - - Well if you bothered to read his page (or even bothered to consider that other people might be in a different living situation than you) you'd know that Dan is only going to be in Davis until next month. With that in mind, I don't find it wasteful at all that he's buying an air mattress instead of an expensive conventional mattress that he wouldn't be able to bring with him anyways. Please try to consider that other people may have different needs than your own before accusing them of "wasteful consumerism." - EyadDarras - - - Indeed, my understanding is that it would be illegal in California for me to sell a mattress at the end of next month to another person without first "fumigating" it. Further, I can't sleep on futon (I broke my back six years ago), and it turns out that a good $50 air mattress is good for about 150 nights of reasonably good sleep before it goes tilt (I patched it about 2 months ago with great success, but apparently two leaks is one too many). My real mattress, back home, cost a good 10-20 times as much, and will probably be used for about 20 times as long, but is going to be much more trouble to dispose of. I'm not thrilled about putting 10 pounds of plastic into my trash this weekend, but in the grand scheme of things, I don't feel especially guilty about it. I haven't been in a private car in two weeks; how long has it been for you? -dan brown - - I think an hour each way is pretty normal for intercity bus trips. Furthermore, longer trip time and misalignment with a personal schedule is an inherent disadvantage to taking public transportation. At the same time, it is an advantage because it provides the opportunity to better understand the geography and society of the area. There are tradeoffs between all choices in any situation and if they are better understood, the most appropriate choice for a particular situation can be more easily made. -NickSchmalenberger - You're right, of course, that this is probably reasonable for an inter-city trip. I'm just grumpy that I needed an inter-city trip to replace my stupid air mattress. If there were a Target in Davis, I would have walked there, and taken the bus home. [I am, however, much better slept today than I was yesterday, and consequently less grumpy.] -dan brown - - I initially started to read this page as a Yes on K voter and after reading the "Considerations" section further down, I have changed my mind. I have a suggestion for those that feel greatly affected by the transportation issue. Maybe a solution would be to create a ride-share program if unable to find a friend to car pool with (maybe even on wiki) for those that have the occasional desire to shop at Target since the route to the new Target though city streets would probably burn almost the same amount of gas as going to Woodland on hte highway (and the slight difference would be negligble if people car pooled anyway). I have to say that I have and probably will engage in Target shopping elsewhere and in the past I was able to share rides with friends since I didn't own a car. The idea of a store that is as large as two football fields is scary to me. I come from San Jose which is a prime example of poor city planning with huge chains and franchises wiping out any character or creativity. I originally was under the impression it was going to be a regular store and NOT an "Oh my god! I'm a huge consumering American" store. Foolish me. Heather Witt - - The problem of riding the bus to Target in Woodland is that the bus winds around in Davis before heading up to Woodland. If you ride your bike to the last stop in Davis before it heads out of town (or take unitrans), then catch the bus for the 10 miles to the first stop in Woodland (you can even take your bike on the bus), the trip is actually much shorter than an hour ride. This seems doable since you would consider riding all the way out to Mace Ranch to shop at the Target there. - ["SharlaDaly"] - - ==Target Sweatshops== - - Target should never be allowed in Davis. Their support of sweatshops and cheap labor made goods cannot be forgiven. --["TobinJones"] - Any references on this? --["RoyWright"] - * Sure: [http://www.knowmore.org/index.php/Target_Corporation] - * You're right; a few of those charges do sound troubling. The problem is that the term "sweatshop" is often used for both voluntary and involuntary conditions. But a couple of those cases do sound like actual coercion was involved. The site you link is hardly without biases, but it sounds like something worth looking into. I rarely set foot in Target anyway, much preferring Wal-Mart. --["RoyWright"] - * Even "voluntary" abuse of labor is bad. And Wal-Mart employs many of the same practices-And then some - * By "voluntary," I mean the workers aren't held at their jobs against their will. If you truly believe that you, from the luxury of Davis, know better than the workers in question whether they should accept a job, then I can only sincerely hope for their sakes that you never gain that kind of power over them. Now, as I said, it seems there may be some genuinely ''in''voluntary labor going on, and if that's the case, it truly is criminal and should be punished. --["RoyWright"] - I don't want that kind of power. Anyway, I've heard plenty of third world workers say that they want better pay, working hours, and such. Some even want workers' control over the factory. --["TobinJones"] - Well, the planning commission met, and I have to say, John Dewes, screw you. It was the standard corporate response, ass-covering, denying, shifting the blame, questioning of sources because they document events that happened two or three years ago. Screw you. You care more about profit than people. We will fight you all the way, you sweatshop owning exploiters. ["TobinJones"] - * Dude. Don't play the sweatshop card. If you're that concerned about illegal sweatshop labor, go shut down the oversea factories yourself. --TR - * "I much prefer Wal-Mart." Is that because they are more shameless about their awful business practices? Just wondering. [AnthonySoto] - * Hey, no worries, your kids will be having to deal with Target's abuse of employees. They'll thank you for the cheap diapers and socks you got in exchange. :) ["JeffWood"] - - ==Right to Build== - Why should the citizens be allowed to decide whether or not a Target is built? Is it really our place to tell Target that they cannot build their complex of stores? I agree that we should not support a target, and boycotts would be something I would take part in and even help organize, but I do not think that it is our place to tell them whether or not they can build a building. I think that the proposition shouldn't have been put on the ballot; the citizens should not make zoning decisions, that's what we elect city officials to do. ["StephenHudson"] - * They could just as easily use an existing building or create an add-on to an existing building than build a completely new one. --TR - * The Planning Commission did reject the zoning change, but the Council chose to do an end-run around their own advisors for reasons of their own by putting it on the ballot. ["JeffWood"] - - ==Other Arguments== - - Stupid lazy lower class people! take the bus to woodland if you like target and walmart and stop with your bitching and endless mindless debates. Do we really need two targets, two walmarts within 10 miles of each other. Quit whining and go ask your parents for enough money to buy a car. Pathetic. You are all transient residents of this community and poor stewards as such. Here is an idea! try stop thinking about your needs for one freaking second and think about what is best for the community you live in. You should know that shitting where you eat is a bad idea, even if you will only be eating here for 4 years. ["DudeNude"] - Please give me a break. You're an embarrassment to all of us who oppose Target. - DudeNude, please show some decency. --TR P.S. Where's the first Target? First Wal-Mart? They're not within 10 miles of me. - - * I'd like to point out that other than the fact that most UC Davis undergrads Graduate in their 5th and 6th years, Students as a population are here to stay, and are an enduring part of the community. We will be here next year, five years from now, and ten after that. And, ["Mike Levy" some] ["Lamar Heystek" of] ["Rob Roy" us] want to stay here and make even more of a difference and help the community for the community members (which include us). In response to "stupid lower class people," because my sarcasm detector has burnt out, I'm going to have to respond seriously: 1.) It isn't just the lower class who are for the target 2.) Why is it that while everyone is Davis seems to support programs for the poor, they don't want to see them (NIMBY)? To "endless mindless debates": 5 of the 13 edits before this were your responses. To "do we need two targets, two walmarts w/in 10 miles of each other": If people do not want to travel the 10 miles, and are passionate enough for another one, then they could say we do need two. I the word 'need' here is too subjective, and varies too much depending on your background, socioeconomic and political. "Quit whining and go ask your parents...buy a car": Some of us are poor, and thusly rely on a large amount of financial aid because we could not otherwise afford to be here. Also, I'd like to make a note of who was whining with the "anonymous" parentheses behind most comments. I've already addressed the transient residents issue, and as for poor stewards, We do not make many decisions, because we are not represented in the city council, because most students feel '''they shouldn't make decisions when they are only here for four years''', and so the cycle continues, and when we do make decisions, which are for the best interests of this significant portion of the community, they are lauded as being selfish and shortsighted. Now, if you, an upstanding member of the community, who presumes to be thinking about what is best for the community, goes in and destroys your credibility of opinion with the line "Stupid lazy lower class people," should I even have spent this effort responding to your ridiculous claims? Oh, and one more thing, please, tell me How you are sure that you know better than I do as to what is best for our community? How can either of us know whats best for something which affects the both of us? PS: Can you check your sarcasm detector, because I'm pretty sure the "Target Rocks" comment was there just to be controversial. Sound familiar?--["MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis] - - Stupid: Building another Target in a small town when there is already one 10 miles away. Stupid: Arguing that we need Target because you are a student and poor. Stupid: Target is a program for the poor. WTF!?!? Stupid: Ignoring the long-term effects of Target on local stores and/or not caring about them because you are a transient member of the community. Stupid: Assuming the students of UC Davis support and/or need target. Yes Micky, the students of UC Davis are an enduring part of the community, but they don't all support Target in Davis. 5-6 years for a 4 year degree is nothing to be proud about either btw, and if that is what keeps you here I suggest focusing on finishing your degree and moving on. (maybe to a town that already has a target. you could even get a job there Micky!) - Lazy: Refusing to drive or take public transportation to the Target in Woodland, if you really HAVE to shop at Target. - * I'm not lazy. I'm busy. I would also rather ride my bike or walk, but not 10+ miles. --TR - Low Class: Anyone that shops at a store like Target to save a buck, while ignoring, or not caring about the injustice, unfair labor practices, and longterm economic implications of supporting corporations such as this. - Oh, please. Not this again. You are not that concerned about the injustice or unfair labor practices if all you do is complain. - * Well smartass, they are closing down the Woodland target. And you missed the main point: it doesn't help Davis not to have a Target. Just last year, Target [http://www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2006/03/14/CityNews/Davis.A.Possible.Target.For.New.Target-1685983.shtml?norewrite200605231042&sourcedomain=www.californiaaggie.com reported] 270,000 purchases with a Davis zipcode. 270,000 is a lot, and that's from the three nearest targets. Gasp! People do go to shop at Target! ''Students and residents in the city who lack a Davis mailing address were omitted from the report, which tracked the income at the three closest Target locations.'' 270,000 purchases, not dollars. Just in tax dollars, thats at least 500k to 800k revenue for the city according to the article. That's a buttload of money Davis is missing out on. I think that many purchases obviously goes FAR beyond just students, and shows that there really is a great demand for Target and its goods. Yeah, it's true people could figure out a way to Sacramento or Vacaville once Woodland closes, and obviously they do. But having a Target is an immediate benefit to Davis, while it's effects on small stores are really questionable. Davis doesn't really have all that much in terms of variety at the ohmygodsogodly mom and pop stores. They also don't seem to be dieing from our other quaint small town mom and pop stores, like Borders/Costplus/Starbucks/Gottschalks/Safeway/Albertsons/Longs/Riteaid/etc. But I'm sure a Target would do the trick, BAM NO MORE DAVIS. - - - Stupid#1: I only have to say that if supply and demand make it so, and part of that is protesting the Target, then however it ends up is how its going to be. I mean, there can't be '''no-one''' who wants the target there, right? And, there has to be someone who would shop there, otherwise they wouldn't have proposed it. So, its your job to protest and not go there, because we want to have some sort of democratic process here. Also, because I hope that these issues are aired in other public forums, there can be a complete view as to what community opinion is. Basically: Is there a market? and What do they want? are my opinions. - Stupid#2: The best justification I can use in terms of Targets prices and being a poor student is that they have less markup, and are more affordable to poor college students, but these are valid arguments from a selfish perspective (aka, i concede the point). - Stupid#3: See point #2 as to the cost, but again, this doesn't take into account the global cost or Stupid#4, and I don't say its a program for the poor, only thing in that area is #2 and slightly increased employment(debatable-- Want stats). - Stupid#4: Disagree over transient member-ness(matter of personal opinion), and I'd like to see a study about the long term effects (though I know they exist to a degree). - Stupid#5: I assume no such thing. I say we (which should be some) are poor, may not have cars, etc, but at no time do I assume students support target. Also, with the 5-6 year thing, thats just a statistic, and I'm just a freshman, who's planning on leaving in 4. Also, statistically, finishing the degree is only one factor that keeps people here 5-6: its having to work, taking advantage of UCDs opportunities, a more laid back culture here, which goes along with heavy club/org involvement, partying, and taking the minimum units per quarter to make Satisfactoy Academic Progress. But I digress. And I'm not going to respond to the ad hominem attack. - Lazy: It all comes down to cost and convenience. You'd be surprised how many people of all backgrounds exhibit these qualities, and how America seems to support these qualities in its populace. Maybe this is just laziness by another name, but it is packaged and sold thoughout the country. Is Davis really that different? - Low class: You'd be surprised how many middle class people do that as well, or do you mean class in terms of "classy" as opposed to economics? Beyond that, some people aren't informed and don't know of the troubles of target, and others it is a choice between a rock and a hard place, with target giving people what they need. We should think about and consider everybody, but traditionally, only the rich or upper-middle class have had that luxury, and if being lower class means looking out for yourself because you can't afford to not shop at Target, then there are even greater problems of inequity in America than just one Target in Davis. What would you be willing to sacrifice for us all to be on equal ground, and not exploiting foreign workers? What have you sacrificed so far? --["MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis] ''PS: I agree with considering the broader implications, but, I'd like to ask you to consider the concepts I pose at the end, which are those of even broader implications than Davis, Ca. I feel they get closer to the root of the matter, but may not be the right thing for a local wiki.'' - This has turned into a really good discussion! My main problem with this issue is people blindly supporting Target out of convenience without understanding the evils that go along with it. This isn't limited to students; as you say America seems to exhibit these qualities in all its populace. It is an endemic problem in this country, and I feel like it is bringing everyone down with it. To be honest, I don't know what to do about it! You are right to some degree in saying that only the upper class can afford to really choose who they buy from. My suggestions here is that maybe we all need to take a hard look at what we really need to survive, and purchase accordingly. Are we really dependent on Target to get the things we need to live, or could we get by with more basic things? Further, are these basic things so expensive elsewhere that we cannot live in Davis without Target? My feeling is that I recognize a need for stores like Target, but I don't want to see them in every single town of the USA, and driving/biking/taking the bus 10 miles to enjoy the Target discount doesn't seem like much of a sacrifice. - The debate over poor people being forced to shop at stores like Target is interesting. You could argue that this is a consequence of Target or Walmart moving into a town and forcing the people to shop there after the local stores close down. The people shop there because the prices are cheap. Are they really getting a good deal when they are buying poor quality goods that will break and won't last? Poor quality goods that are made in places with unfair labor practices that will ultimately undermine the American economy. - As an aside, I find the over-priced-alternative social-conscious-eco-friendly-organic and natural alternatives to be equally as ridiculous. If only rich people have the luxary of making the right decision, then how will this be sustainable or make a difference? - - ==Yes on Target== - - The opportunity is here, and may get shut down if more people don’t speak up to say '''“YES! I want a Target in my town.”''' Don’t leave the decisions up to the nay-sayers… - - - Meanwhile, the Target Corporation is getting serious about moving into Davis, establishing [http://www.targetindavis.com/] to promote their new store. - - '''1. Speak to City Council: June 13''' - '''Public Forum begins around 8pm at ["City Hall"] in the ["City Council Community Chambers" Community Chambers], 23 ["Russell Boulevard" Russell Blvd.] on the corner of 5th & B''' - - Just got back from the meeting (it is currently 3:15 am). I gave my input during public comment time as did many, many others. (To name a few: ["Lamar Heystek"], ["Rob Roy"], owner of ["The Avid Reader"], owner of ["Bizarro World"], mothers, longtime residents, some middle schoolers, etc.) The overwhelming response during public comment time was "NO NO NO Target". All in all: Davis is vehemently opposed to a Target in town. The issue is slated into next week's city council agenda for even further discussion, where fiscal and environmental impact, along w/other concerns, will be discussed. And now, before I become any more incapable of writing a satisfactory report, I will say good evening/good morning and go to sleep. --["Elise Kane"] - - 2. Email your City Officials from ['''http://www.targetindavis.com'''] - - [http://www.targetindavis.com/target_news.wmv Target Debate] - - [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJZHSfzDOg No on Measure K supporter stealing a Target sign.] - - ----- - - ==No on Target== - - [[Image(Dont_Big_Box_Davis_Sign.JPG, right, thumbnail, 300, "Sign in the window of a business ["downtown"]")]] - - On November 7th, Davis residents will vote whether to allow a 137,000 square foot Big-Box (Target) store and four additional unnamed stores comprising 46,000 square feet onto Mace Blvd and 2nd Street, in Mace Ranch. - - This project flies in the face of Davis General Plan that limits retail to 30,000 square feet and specifically calls for neighborhood shopping outside of downtown, not regional. A store of this size will dominate retail and cause store closings downtown and in neighborhood centers. - - The zoning change required will break faith with the Mace Ranch neighborhood. The traffic, pollution and crime that the center will create will affect quality of life throughout Davis. Furthermore, hidden costs to support this development will offset the tax gains Target promised while wooing the City Council. - - Go to [http://www.DontBigBoxDavis.org/] for more information. Keep our city special instead of supporting "me-too" retail sprawl. - - ==Jobs== - - Try asking him about the lowest income wages again. :) I mean, um, there were more Dewes hyjinks tonight. --["JosephBleckman"] - Oh, do tell. --["TobinJones"] - * One of the Councilmen kept asking Dewes what the lowest income wage set could be. Tellingly Dewes answered at first by talking about their benefit package. When asked again he kept glancing back at his boss/comerades while saying that he couldn't answer due to the many different starting types. As he was continued to be grilled into answering the question that was the answer he gave over and over and over again. The man looked enormously flustered. Unfortunately the Councilman running that inquisition gave up rather than forcing him to give a non-B.S. answer. --["JosephBleckman"] - What does how much Target pays have anything to do with this issue anyway? If they treat their employees so badly, THEY will suffer by not getting qualified people working for them. I bet there are plenty of employers in Davis downtown that can hardly compete with Target in terms of pay, benefit, and flexibility. Should we kick them out of Davis? Or would they be afraid that Davis employers can't compete with what Target offers their employees? From job opportunity perspective, there's absolutely nothing negative about having more options in Davis especially in a small town like Davis with tens of thousands of students. If you want to oppose Target, stick to NIMBY or No Big Box in my precious little town theories and don't waste time trying to make it an union/workers' right issue. --["BrianYasmin"] - My concern isn't about the Davis laborers. It's about the workers in Saipan who have been coerced and threatened into working in factories for Target. I don't know that much about Target's first-world practices, but their third world ones are abominable. - It's not a Davis downtown labor issue, but probably for different reasons than you think. If the Target is built, I wager that 80% of the labor force will be minorities from Dixon and Woodland. Why? Because they have a better work ethic and more flexible hours than most students. After all, how many UCD students are willing to put on the Target apron and push carts across the parking lot? How many UCD students will be able to schedule classes so that they can get out to the other side of town to put in 4 hours then come back across town? As to working conditions, I am sure that Target will not treat their employees as well as downtown merchants. I challenge you to go into Ace Hardware or Dibbert Lumber and ask the help if they are going to consider changing jobs to Target. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] - So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["BrianYasmin"] - I said it wasn't* a downtown Davis Labor issue and I didn't say I had a problem with 80% of the workers coming from Dixon and Woodland. Personally, I'd prefer an employer that paid good wages and benefits, but OTOH, if we run all the businesses out of town that pay minimum wage, there wouldn't be a lot of restaurants, hotels and movie theaters left. - Typical. --["TobinJones"] - - And how exactly does a lack of Target keep Davis "special and unique"? Thats BS, there are big box stores here, one more won't kill Davis, since the only possible competition is ACE, another big-box! -["AllisonEriksen"] - * Point of clarification, Davis ACE is a [http://davisace.com/pages/history.cgi locally owned] big-box. -["Users/Pxlated"] - - There are no "big box" stores here by any of the traditional definitions of the term. Davis Ace, which is locally owned (Ace is a retailer coop), is 37,000 sq. ft. "Big Box" usually means 80 - 100,000 sq.ft. +, and not locally owned; i.e., Wal-Mart, Target, CostCo. -["Users/DonShor"] - - ==Considerations== - - A) There are already many places in Davis to buy things like toothpaste, soap, etc. including but not limited to several Safeways, 2 Longs drug stores, 2 Rite-Aid drug stores, two Nugget Stores, and at least a dozen 7-11 type stores (not to mention the COOP). - - B) Cost Plus or the World Trade store or whatever they are calling it now occupies what was an already existing building in the downtown area. - - C) Corporate Stores like Target, Home Depot and other BORGS (as well as most of the smaller chain stores) are playing the "world domination" game, constantly merging, absorbing each other, reorganizing and/or going bankrupt. In the meantime, their goal is to create a string of stores no further apart than 20 miles so that no one has to travel more than ten miles to get to one. - - D) These stores mostly carry crap products which can be sold for less than their higher quality counterparts, creating the illusion of low prices. In addition, because these stores buy in such high volumes, they can dictate how products, even "brand name" products can be packaged, further enhancing this illusion. For example Costco (formerly Price Club) used to sell a case of 24 12 oz. bottles of Martinelli's Sparkling Apple Cider. But at some point, without any "fanfare" those bottles "shrunk" to 10 oz. The package looked the same, was the same size and sold for the same price but the customer was getting 48 oz. less of juice, the equivalent of four of the original 12 oz. bottles. Tactics like this are the standard for these companies so don't be deceived into thinking that by patronizing them, you are getting a better deal. Do the math and you will see what I am talking about. - - E) When OSH opened their Woodland store, there were three independently owned hardware stores in the town including the much loved Cranston Bros. All three disappeared within a year. When Staples opened their store, there were two very good office supply stores which also very quickly went under which, along with the hardware stores, left gaping holes in the downtown that were eventually occupied by mattress stores, el-cheapo furniture outlets and the like. This is already happening in downtown Davis. - - F) None of the major problems we now face are going to be solved without some "sacrifice". Until we stop thinking that everything we want must be within easy reach, we are not going to fix anything. How many times has the argument been made that it is wasteful to have to drive ten miles to Woodland to go the Target Store? Give me a break! It's only ten miles! If you live in West Davis, it will be three miles to a "Mace Ranch" Target and most of that will be "stop and go driving" which will use far more fuel than hopping up to Woodland on 113. And god forbid that you suggest taking the bus or ride sharing! Anyway, even if one is not concerned about fuel waste, it's going to be cheaper to pay five cents more for your toothpaste in Davis than to burn a gallon or more of gas driving to Woodland. - - G) Buying clothing is an issue in Davis but it's not going to be solved by Target. Personally, I think we should be encouraging vendors who are willing to maintain smaller outlets in the downtown. For example, the "Discoveries" building with it's 6,000 sq. ft. could have easily housed a clothing store. So could the old City Hall building which, instead, is now home to yet another "yuppie" bistro. - - H) Ever since the people of this country ceased to be referred to as "the people" and were "re-packaged" as "the consumer", we have been sinking deeper and deeper into the pit. The truth is, we don't need 90% of the crap we buy. We are truly "consuming" with our willingness to play into the hands of the corporate giants by allowing ourselves to be suckered into buying shoddy products that will not last any longer than the pitiful "90 day warranties" we get with them. I for one hate shopping. If I need a pair of pants, I want to buy a pair of pants that is going to last as long as possible, takes a few resources as possible to produce and that I don't have to deal with a herd of giant butts shoving around shopping carts full of Coke and potato chips while listening to Muzak versions of Barry Manilow songs to get. We simply MUST understand that an economy based on consumption and growth is the antithesis of sustainability as are stores like Target. - - I) We keep hearing how the City of Davis needs the tax revenues generated by big stores. But one has to wonder just how much of this money is really needed and how much of it is simply being used to turn Davis into one big strip mall. I refer to the completely unneeded new "cop shop", the ridiculous Pole Line road "improvement" project that resulted in those stupid planter islands full of freeway bush and trees that will only make it harder to see the oncoming traffic, and the most recent fiasco, the phony brick "blurps" that were added to the major downtown intersections which resulted in much more traffic constriction (due to the loss of the "right turn lanes"), difficulty in accessing the four corner parallel parking spaces and an actual net loss of parking spaces. Maybe I could throw in the giant video cameras mounted on top of the "parking snarfer" vehicles. Too hard to reach out there with the chalk stick is it? Is this stuff really needed? I don't think so. I hate to have to be the one to point this out, but this stuff does not represent progress. It is simply represents the ultimate expression of conspicuous consumption, not exactly what a "forward thinking" community like Davis should be promoting. --["DavidDeCristoforo"] - - - The proposed target store is 137,000 sq ft, larger than Wal-Mart in Woodland and the size of 2.4 football fields. The entire project covers 19 acres and includes 46,000 sq ft of other undisclosed retail, but the Target is the heart of the matter. If K passes, this giant Target will be Davis' first Big-Box store. Big-Box means one-stop shopping for low priced, low quality goods; it is always auto-dependent with massive parking lots and freeway access; it provides low wage jobs and promotes sweatshop labor overseas; it is predatory and drives smaller shops out of business; it is the exemplar of rampant sprawl, consumerism and cultural homogenization. Some people are OK with all this as long as Big-Box delivers convenience and price, but a growing number of Davisites find what we are being asked to give up too high a price for cheap socks. - - As mentioned, the Target store alone is 137,000 sq ft; the current limit on retail in Davis is 30,000 sq ft. Making such a huge leap in retail scale disregards our city's General Plan process and endangers current and future retail stores that were designed within the city's standards. With it's tremendous unfair size advantage the Big-Box will cause store closings downtown and in neighborhood centers. Any new retail in Davis will have to meet the new scale, for only Big-Box can compete with Big-Box. With Measure K as precedent, the 52 acres along 2nd street adjacent to this project will be developed without public vote and filled with Lowes, Home Depot, Costco or what have you—who else is going to build next to a Super-Target? At this point, downtown and the small malls will be afflicted with store closings and permanent vacancies. Instead of the consumer "choice" and "convenience" promised we will all have to drive to the freeway for goods we used to get at our neighborhood centers. - Even if there is "only" the one Big-Box, as the Yes on K folks falsely promise ( ask yourself, have you ever seen a Target store surrounded by quiet fields and idyllic grasslands?), that alone will cause massive store closings. Target's own projections for a Davis store's earnings are $60 Million EVERY YEAR. That money has to come from somewhere, namely from established local businesses. With every adjoining community already having Big-Box stores, a Davis Target will not draw regional sales—excepting a few freeway travelers it's sales must come entirely from Davisites. Target is touting the number of credit card sales Davis residents make at outlying Targets as justification of their placement here, but anyone can tell you that Target Corp is not locating in Davis to get sales they already have in Woodland—they have to divert sales from established local business to survive and profit. But how much will be diverted? The National Trust for Historic preservation says that a Big-Box store diverts 80% of its sales from existing local business. Target hired their own firm, CBRichard Ellis to do an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) during the proposal process; CBRE based all their calculations (including the unbelievable and inaccurate sales tax projections) on a 2% diversion rate. So Target is going to come and pluck 98% of $60 Million from thin air every year....besides doing EIRs, CBRE is, uncoincidentally, a major real estate broker for Target Corp. I'm inclined to believe the Historic Preservation folks, but even if a very conservative 50% of targets earnings are diverted, that is still $30 Million every year! Our malls, downtown shops, groceries and pharmacies cannot take that kind of loss. - As Target sells virtually everything including groceries, pharmacy, general merchandise and garden items, many stores will be directly affected. But the draw of customer traffic will threaten even non-competitive, non-retail businesses. Restaurants will struggle as adjacent shops close; malls will lose their anchors and the small shops will follow; every shopping area will suffer as customer traffic is diverted to the freeway. "One-stop shopping" doesn't leave much room, or money, for anyone else. And as the smaller shops close, everything we were promised by Measure K proponents fades away. Consumer choice is gone as Big-Box is our only option for many goods. Convenience is gone as we can no longer walk or bike to Longs or Rite-Aid or ACE, now closed. Sales tax revenue and jobs are gone as the deceased shops produced more in sum than the Big-Box does. Worst of all, Davis' unique character, quality of life and small-town charm is gone, irretrievably. - Proponents of K are dismissing such predictions as dire and unrealistic, yet this is exactly what has happened in every small town across the country that has allowed Big-Box on its periphery. Visit downtown Woodland, Vacaville or Fairfield if you want to see Big-Box blight in evidence. That Big-Box diverts sales and closes small businesses is such an accepted fact within our culture that The Simpsons and Family Guy make fun of it; does Target really think they can spend enough money to refute common knowledge? Apparently so, as Pro-Kers also like to claim that their Big-Box mall with its 19 acres of pavement and 10.000 additional car trips A DAY to sell landfill-clogging disposable goods produced without environmental restrictions half a world away and transported here by the cheapest, most polluting methods is somehow "Green". Please. An environmentally sound Big-Box mall is like a healthy meal at McDonalds. Like Target, PG&E is now posing as "Green" to influence the H&I vote. How gullible do they think we are? - The Yes on K campaign's signs say "I LOVE Target". Well, I don't hate or love Target and I know that Target Corporation doesn't love me. Like any corporation, they exist only for the bottom line of profit and see us as potential dollars, nothing more. I do however, Love Davis. I grew up here, went to school here, graduated UCD, started my own small business downtown, bought a home on Pole Line Rd and I am raising my son here. I Love Davis for it's small town feel, our sense of community, it's environmentalism and bike-friendliness, the sense of security and Davis' unique character. A massive Big-Box freeway mall is entirely inconsistent with this and puts it all at risk. MEASURE K will change the face of Davis, universally for the worse. Preserve our community. Vote NO on K. - - ----- - - One of these Meassure K activists (pro? con? I don't care) sent an automatic-dialer poll to my cell phone. Isn't that against some law of some sort? -- ["MichaelGiardina"] - - It might have sounded automatic because of the tone of the voice of the speaker. After calling a few hundred people the activist will start to speak more automatically in the phone. I can tell you that the Yes on Measure K do not do automatic calls and I think it is against the law in certain circumstances. --["SteveOstrowski"] - - No on K has never done a phone poll. I can guarantee you of this because I'm the treasurer of the campaign and we don't have that kind of money. Ye$ on K are the only people doing polling right now for this measure. There are two donors to the Ye$ on K campaign (I'm sure you can guess the first one) Target and Ziegler Associates for a total of $30,100. As of 9/30/2006, Ye$ on K has racked up $120,000 in unpaid bills (see dontbigboxdavis.org for reports). No on K has over 250 donors and $18,000 in total donations all from community members and The ["Sierra Club"]. In addition, if Ye$ on K is so "Green" why is The Sierra Club endorsing NO on K?! Also if they are so "Go Green!" why are they waisting fossil fuels by driving trucks around with billboards. The only "Green" I see here is the money that Target will be making and sending to Minneapolis. -DebWestergaard - - I know first hand that Yes on Measure K people will send voice mails that may sound like a computer because on occasion I sound like a computer or automatic message. Also I would like to point out that the Sierra Club will never be satisfied until all human construction is at a halt. This Target store is only one of a very few selected by LEED and if this building is environmentally unsound then all are. --["SteveOstrowski"] - - You don't get "selected" by LEED. It's a certification level. There are 4 levels of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) that exist and Target is offering to build the lowest and minimum level (Certified). If UC Merced can build an entire campus of "Silver" level LEED, then a multimillion dollar corporation can definitely afford to build the highest level as well. I see you're a Christian Democratic Party Speaker and it's truly ironic that you support Target. Since 2004, Target has given $100,000 to Citizens to Save California, which worked to qualify the governor's initiatives for the special election ballot, and $210,000 to the governor's California Recovery Team, which supports Schwarzenegger's political aims. Target also spent $250,000 to back a referendum that erased a law that would have required many California businesses to provide health care for their workers, and $100,000 to the California Business Properties Association, another of Schwarzenegger's backers. [http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/23/BAGDKEBPA71.DTL] BTW, that's Greenpeace not Sierra Club that wants human construction halted ;-) Just as a friendly note, please check into all the facts not just convenient ones before posting about this very important proposal. -DebWestergaard - - Target is supported by a great many Christians in the Davis area and I know first hand the generosity of Target stores to Christian and secular charities and projects. You seem to imply that the governor's proposals are not Christian in which case I would like to explore those reasons on another forum. I do not believe that Target is a Christian issue other than the fact that many Christian students and families do support Target and as such I would like Measure K to pass. Also it should be noticed that the high ranking officials of LEAD and Student Focus are also for Target passing. --["SteveOstrowski"] - * Clearly Target exists to build churches and homeless shelters - I am sure it is not done for public relations to do one upmanship on WalMart in the slightest. Also, after much thought, I am going to refrain from criticizing you using peer pressure as your central argument to support this legislation. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] - - A bit off "target" here [snicker], but I'd like to qualify the Sierra Club comments; the group was pretty vehemently opposed to just about every proposed dog park site including one pre-approved by the City five years earlier. While I can't say that they want "all human construction halted," this is one former environmentalist who has found Sierra Club to be a bit over-zealous in protecting land from virtually all uses aside from birding. --["AlphaDog"] - - I returned home one day from a friend's house to find a "Yes on K" sign on my lawn, which was put up without my permission. I live on Anderson and I've been told that my lawn is a great advertising space. I just think it is really classy to put a sign on someone's private property without their permission. --["EnirytManaen"] - - If I see any of you anti-Target people there shopping for so much as a battery, I'm calling the police. It's like the vegans who wear leather belts and give you the "It's already dead and I'm not wasteful" excuse. It's like being a militant athiest then banging on the gates of heaven with tears in your eyes. It's like shaving your head and getting an SS tattoo, then seeing a hot Jew. You're gonna be bummed out when you need a tubesock. -- ["JoshFernandez"] - * Target doesn't sell socks in my size. I have to drive (horror) to Sacramento to find a place for clothes. Target doesn't meet my needs in this regard. Is that fair? -- ["JeffWood"] - - -- Fair that you have freakishly big/small feet? Hm. Probably not. - - For the love of god, someone make an "I <3 Child Labor" sign to put around town. We need them to defeat this unquestioning senseless corporate jingoism. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] - - The proposed Target in Davis has nothing to do with other corporate practices in Third World countries. That's like saying that every employee of Target is somehow supportive of child labor. --["SteveOstrowski"] - - * Oh give me a break. I think their "I heart Target, oh boy! Gush with happiness lolz!1" signs are completely ridiculous. I am trying to mock their campaign practices with analysis of the production process. You don't claim to love the environment and steamroll fields with asphalt and erect large shopping centers. Come on. I'm just waiting for Westfield to buy it out... -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] - - I am not against the idea of having a Target store in Davis. I am against the idea of having a 137,000 square foot Target store in Davis. I recognize that Davis residents need some of the things that Target can provide, and I also recognize that a lot of tax revenue bleeds to other cities when people have to go elsewhere to get these items. But that doesn't mean we need to start bringing in overly-huge megastores. We have successfully integrated many reasonably-sized chain stores in Davis -- Cost Plus, Borders, Dollar Tree, etc... I would much rather see a reasonably-sized (eg. 80,000 sq ft) Target with a couple of smaller stores next to it than an enormous Target with only one other store. I will be voting NO on K. --["AlexPomeranz"] - - Well the deal is that if this fails other corporate stores will not want to run the chance of trying to enter Davis and it will be years before Target or other stores will try. Also your argument is about size, a store that is on the eastern side not hurting anyone within most of the city. Bigger size means more products and more availability. It's like you can't say that I will disapprove of this large store but approve of another smaller one. This is it, whether or not to have a Target in Davis, not a debate over it's size. The debate over its size was dealt with a long time ago when the city send this development to the voters. --["SteveOstrowski"] - * Why can't you say that? It makes sense, especially in the context he uses. - * Other corporate stores will not enter Davis? I hate having to travel to East Bay to go to Albertsons, Safeway, The dollar store, Rite-Aid, Cost Plus Worldmart, or a liquidating tower records. Traversing the causeway for a McDonald's, an In-N-Out, a KFC, a Dairy Queen, or an AM/PM has taken a toll on me. - In those 2 Safeways, Nuggets, Rite-Aids, Longs and Albertsons that I have imagined existing here in Davis, I have envisioned an entire aisle dedicated to soda and another to chips. I dream of a Safeway that dedicates more shelf space to the Coca-Cola Company then to all of Africa, India, and the Middle East combined. I dream of a Davis where local character and flair, diversity and the dreams, intrigue and uniqueness are lost because we offer the exact same on streets with different names then the next town over. - - Culture is married to diversity and their souls have been stolen by the Targets and Walmarts of our day. The acts that shape you as an individual are actively being traded out for conformity by those that pander to the lowest common denominator. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- - ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] - - I like to look at th 3 smaller keywords on the campaign signs - - preserve our community, neighborhoods and downtown Vs. Choice. Funds for davis and sustainability - - funds for davis is $2 per person, not that great in the grand scheme of things, choice on where to shop? go down poleline and go to that target when the close the CFM location to move it next to the costco that will be there. - Can someone tell me what sustainability means in the sense of target, that it won't close? - My first instinct was to vote against it and I'm not going to second guess myself. Even if target panders to Davis with it's leed building --["StevenDaubert"] - oh and howcome the council still pushes the issue on the voters when all the committes save the development one disprove of the idea? - I look at people on the don't big box site and I see Sue Greenwald, Julie Partansky, Ken Wagstaff, Mike Harrington, Stan Forbes and Lamar Heystek. All these people represent the values that I see in Davis and have been demonstrating there view thru politics for some time. I would trust them quicker then I would trust Puntillo. - - -- I believe that the K/Target measure has been thoroughly greenwashed. Some of the components of the LEED certification are already required by the city, and the outskirt position of the store virtually mandates driving there anyway. The debate has been framed around whether or not this Target will be energy efficient, which it will - more so than almost all "big-box" stores. (As long as the thermostat is kept under tight control. The pro-K folks also had no idea whether something so simple such as skylights would be installed.) I particularly favor the prospect of showers for bicyclists, as someone who once rode 6 miles for a summer hardware store job. The environmental impact will not be significant, due in part to the large buffer zone they will be creating, when compared with what otherwise might be built there. Many Davisites would agree that this particular store will be better, environmentally, than most cities are being offered, and so if you agree that LEED certification is good, then it seems that the argument for Target is over? Wrong. - - This is one of the things about greenwashing - the debate has been framed around what is not the most important aspect of the Measure K issue. I believe that the strongest argument against Target is the economic one. I took some time to interview the (paid) pro-K and (volunteer) anti-K advocates at the Farmer's Market, and after inquiring about the details of the environmental arguments, I brought up the economic arguments, suggesting that they were stronger. The Pro-K folks tell us that it will bring tax revenue to the city of Davis, and in the short run there is no doubt that it will, but will it have a long-term negative or positive effect? Large retailers that don't pay their workers a living wage drain city services. It is certain that in the short-term, Davis will enjoy extra tax revenues, but where will these come from? - - We're being told that the new Target will not put locals out of business, that instead, the green Target will be Davisites that have already been shopping at the Target in Woodland. It is argued that Davis ''should'' get these tax revenues. It follows logically that if these people are no longer shopping at the Woodland Target, then building a Target in Davis should pull revenues out of Woodland. I asked the pro-K advocate at the market a direct question about this - that if the tax revenue is coming from shoppers that would have gone to Woodland otherwise, then doesn't that mean that this would have a negative effect on Woodland? He was evasive and said that we can't know that for sure. (Therefore, you can't know for sure that there would be a positive effect on Davis) - - It's simple math. If you add tax revenues to Davis that are from people no longer shopping in Woodland, then you have to be subtracting those tax revenues from Woodland. And unless you are paid to obfuscate on a simple question, there should be no problem with admitting that. The Woodland Target is on the chopping block as well, as they hope to build a bigger one on I-5, in addition to the one in Davis. (No other Target will be LEED-certified like the one in Davis. That puts a dollop of brown ink in the buckets of green paint used in the campaign.) The point is, Target is setting one city against another in a war over each other's tax revenues, and is playing the hero that will bring city tax income relief, until they have statistics on neighboring cities purchasing in their stores. Next might be Dixon, and they may tell Dixon that Davis doesn't deserve the tax revenues that they currently promise us - and so once the Davis store is in place they will forget loyalties as they have announced they will do to Woodland. I think we need to frame this issue in the context of the longer term. Measure K is a clear attempt to get around the general plan that Davis has put together, and doesn't take into account the long term effects on this community and others around them. The arguments being made are written up in terms of carbon dioxide emissions rather than the economic issues that make considering a Target-type store different from any other store. - - A Target in Davis will not ruin the town, nor does Davis meet all of the needs of its citizens with the available stores. But the desire to meet everyone's needs does not automatically mean that Targets and Wal-Marts should move in. We should be thinking about how we can encourage more stores that would meet those needs without going against the general plan - my home town of Petaluma is busy revitalizing its interior rather than just building a bunch of giant stores. And Davisites could think about being a little more inventive with their shopping. Once you realize that those Target and Wal-Mart towels and tube-socks fall apart quickly, you'll see that you aren't saving yourself any money in the process. Thrift Stores are a great way to add interesting and sometimes (paradoxically) long-lasting clothing items to your wardrobe. You could always shop in town, or plan a carpooled trip to Woodland to shop at all the thrift stores on Main Street, and pop over to the Target on Gibson for whatever you're missing. You might also want to consider whether you're truly saving money or being [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader manipulated.] Target expects to make quite a bit of money, [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2006/10/31/news/061new1.txt take a look at this.] - - I have less than a year left in this town, nevertheless I fell obligated to vote no on K because I don't think it will help Davis or its citizens in the long run. The environmental argument is the weakest argument for the new Target, and it is telling that the pro-K campaign decided to make that part of the central slogan (I Heart Green), when the economic issues are more pertinent. The fact that they won't do simple math that follows logically from their central economic arguments suggests to me that the Target company would like us to believe that shoppers, taxes, and income just pop out of nowhere as if by magic, and don't affect anyone except for increasing tax revenues. I decided to look into the measure K issue at first because of the environmental arguments being made, but I realized that they were a distraction. Davis is a town full of very smart people, and I don't think they they'd be fooled for a minute that this is really about the environment. - - The real true winner of the Measure K debate, however, was ["Choice Voting" Davis Choice Voting]. While I spent over an hour talking to both pro and anti-K, they offered me a chair. Something tells me no one expected anyone to want to stop and flesh out the details for or against K. Measure L is now the only ad on my lawn. - Thanks for reading and voting. -["KarlMogel"]	+ Oh, I'm gonna keep my baby, ooh + Don't you stop loving me daddy + I know, I'm keeping my baby

Target Debate

senioritis — 2008-03-28 08:36:11

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 105:	Line 105:
-	+ * Why don't you try it yourself? It only takes about 2 hours round-trip (minimum)? Two hours you say? Yes. The 42 leaves at the half and gets there around 25 minutes later where you must spend the next hour shopping because that is when the next bus arrives. Only need to grab a couple items? Tough, you gotta wait. Need a little more than an hour? Maybe 10 extra minutes? Well, then better plan to browse the aisles for the remainder of that hour. Add 30 minutes for the ride back to Davis and you're set. Thankfully the Yolo bus is free for students...otherwise I'd seriously consider resorting to using the Aggie newspaper the next time I run out of toilet paper...or you can do as some of my friends do: raid university bathrooms. What's that? There's a Rite Aid you say? Yes, the same Rite Aid that made a killing off of coat hangers (ONLY $3.50 a dozen) when I moved into the freshman dorms. To all you bandwagon jumpers that say a Target is bad...consider this: Students are forced to either be ripped off in Davis or take bus/commute regularly to Woodland/Vacaville for necessities at fair prices. If anything, my experience in Davis has changed my heinous view of Walmart. What Davis student could possibly need a $800 bed (offered downtown!) when a $80 futon from Walmart could do? Walmart was there for me when I needed to furnish my room on a student budget. As a "town" that prides itself in being a college-town the needs of its students should not be taken lightly. --Senioritis

Target Debate

EricVanGelder — 2008-03-25 13:54:11

(quick edit)

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 22:	Line 22:
- Target will come, Cars/trucks/SUVs returning home from bay area jobs to Sacramento will follow, the city of Davis will get property taxes, smaller more locally owned businesses will disapear, Davis residents will purchase heaps of things at amiable prices, Target execs will get rich, Target employees will pay rent, own a used car, and eat food, third world exploitation will continue at a violent rate, local and global environments will be degraded, life will go on along its socially, economic, and environmentally unsustainable trajectory towards some sort of collapse. Charge!	+ Target will come. Cars/trucks/SUVs returning home from bay area jobs to Sacramento will follow. The city of Davis will get property taxes. Smaller more locally owned businesses will disappear. Davis residents will purchase heaps of things at amiable prices. Target execs will get rich. Target employees will pay rent, own a used car, and have barbecues. Third world exploitation will continue at a violent rate. Local and global environments will be degraded. Life will go on along its socially, economically, and environmentally unsustainable trajectory towards some sort of collapse. Charge!

Target Debate

EricVanGelder — 2008-03-25 11:19:10

(quick edit)

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 21:	Line 21:
	+ + Target will come, Cars/trucks/SUVs returning home from bay area jobs to Sacramento will follow, the city of Davis will get property taxes, smaller more locally owned businesses will disapear, Davis residents will purchase heaps of things at amiable prices, Target execs will get rich, Target employees will pay rent, own a used car, and eat food, third world exploitation will continue at a violent rate, local and global environments will be degraded, life will go on along its socially, economic, and environmentally unsustainable trajectory towards some sort of collapse. Charge!

Target Debate

JasonAller — 2007-12-29 20:26:53

link fix. This link was showing up as being on other pages?

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 214:	Line 214:
- There are no "big box" stores here by any of the traditional definitions of the term. Davis Ace, which is locally owned (Ace is a retailer coop), is 37,000 sq. ft. "Big Box" usually means 80 - 100,000 sq.ft. +, and not locally owned; i.e., Wal-Mart, Target, CostCo. -["UsersDonShor"]	+ There are no "big box" stores here by any of the traditional definitions of the term. Davis Ace, which is locally owned (Ace is a retailer coop), is 37,000 sq. ft. "Big Box" usually means 80 - 100,000 sq.ft. +, and not locally owned; i.e., Wal-Mart, Target, CostCo. -["Users/DonShor"]

Target Debate

CovertProfessor — 2007-12-28 23:07:20

link

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 251:	Line 251:
- No on K has never done a phone poll. I can guarantee you of this because I'm the treasurer of the campaign and we don't have that kind of money. Ye$ on K are the only people doing polling right now for this measure. There are two donors to the Ye$ on K campaign (I'm sure you can guess the first one) Target and Ziegler Associates for a total of $30,100. As of 9/30/2006, Ye$ on K has racked up $120,000 in unpaid bills (see dontbigboxdavis.org for reports). No on K has over 250 donors and $18,000 in total donations all from community members and The Sierra Club. In addition, if Ye$ on K is so "Green" why is The Sierra Club endorsing NO on K?! Also if they are so "Go Green!" why are they waisting fossil fuels by driving trucks around with billboards. The only "Green" I see here is the money that Target will be making and sending to Minneapolis. -DebWestergaard	+ No on K has never done a phone poll. I can guarantee you of this because I'm the treasurer of the campaign and we don't have that kind of money. Ye$ on K are the only people doing polling right now for this measure. There are two donors to the Ye$ on K campaign (I'm sure you can guess the first one) Target and Ziegler Associates for a total of $30,100. As of 9/30/2006, Ye$ on K has racked up $120,000 in unpaid bills (see dontbigboxdavis.org for reports). No on K has over 250 donors and $18,000 in total donations all from community members and The ["Sierra Club"]. In addition, if Ye$ on K is so "Green" why is The Sierra Club endorsing NO on K?! Also if they are so "Go Green!" why are they waisting fossil fuels by driving trucks around with billboards. The only "Green" I see here is the money that Target will be making and sending to Minneapolis. -DebWestergaard

Target Debate

Aaron.Curtin — 2007-11-13 21:58:22

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 17:	Line 17:
	+ + "Poor People" do not shop at Target. Shopping at stores like this is a way for people to save $$$. To say that they are "poor" for doing so, is just plain ignorant. I go where I need to to get what I need without wasting $$$. This is how I keep from being "poor". - Aaron.Curtin

Target Debate

DonShor — 2007-11-07 01:52:12

comment

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 212:	Line 212:
	+ There are no "big box" stores here by any of the traditional definitions of the term. Davis Ace, which is locally owned (Ace is a retailer coop), is 37,000 sq. ft. "Big Box" usually means 80 - 100,000 sq.ft. +, and not locally owned; i.e., Wal-Mart, Target, CostCo. -["UsersDonShor"] +

Target Debate

PxlAted — 2007-11-06 16:49:40

(quick edit)

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 210:	Line 210:
	+ * Point of clarification, Davis ACE is a [http://davisace.com/pages/history.cgi locally owned] big-box. -["Users/Pxlated"]

Target Debate

TusharRawat — 2007-11-01 17:59:55

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 210:	Line 210:
- * Davis is special and unique because it has stores like Borders, Jamba Juice, Albersons, Safeway... etc. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]

Target Debate

TusharRawat — 2007-11-01 17:58:55

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 12:	Line 12:
- * Right... that's why Folsom, which is still a small town, has a Target, Wal-Mart, Kohls, WinCo, had a Food Source and a former K-Mart where the Kohls is. Oh, and I completely forgot to mention Borders, Home Depot, and CostCo. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]	+ * Right... that's why Folsom, which is still a small town, has a Target, Wal-Mart, Kohls, WinCo, had a Food Source and a former K-Mart where the Kohls is. Oh, and I completely forgot to mention Borders, Home Depot, and CostCo. --TR
Line 17:	Line 17:
- * I respect and admire you, Philip, but I'm tired of paying "club prices" for food items at Safeway and Albertson's that are standard prices at big box retailers. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]
Line 42:	Line 41:
- * Agreed --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]	+ * Agreed --TR
Line 101:	Line 100:
- * No, but it is inconvenient. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]	+ * No, but it is inconvenient. --TR
Line 130:	Line 129:
- * Dude. Don't play the sweatshop card. If you're that concerned about illegal sweatshop labor, go shut down the oversea factories yourself. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]	+ * Dude. Don't play the sweatshop card. If you're that concerned about illegal sweatshop labor, go shut down the oversea factories yourself. --TR
Line 136:	Line 135:
- * They could just as easily use an existing building or create an add-on to an existing building than build a completely new one. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]	+ * They could just as easily use an existing building or create an add-on to an existing building than build a completely new one. --TR
Line 143:	Line 142:
- * DudeNude, please show some decency. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat] P.S. Where's the first Target? First Wal-Mart? They're not within 10 miles of me.	+ * DudeNude, please show some decency. --TR P.S. Where's the first Target? First Wal-Mart? They're not within 10 miles of me.
Line 149:	Line 148:
- * I'm not lazy. I'm busy. I would also rather ride my bike or walk, but not 10+ miles. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]	+ * I'm not lazy. I'm busy. I would also rather ride my bike or walk, but not 10+ miles. --TR
Line 152:	Line 151:
- * Well smartass, they are closing down the Woodland target. And you missed the main point: it doesn't help Davis not to have a Target. Just last year, Target [http://www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2006/03/14/CityNews/Davis.A.Possible.Target.For.New.Target-1685983.shtml?norewrite200605231042&sourcedomain=www.californiaaggie.com reported] 270,000 purchases with a Davis zipcode. 270,000 is a lot, and that's from the three nearest targets. Gasp! People do go to shop at Target! ''Students and residents in the city who lack a Davis mailing address were omitted from the report, which tracked the income at the three closest Target locations.'' 270,000 purchases, not dollars. Just in tax dollars, thats at least 500k to 800k revenue for the city according to the article. That's a butload of money Davis is missing out on. I think that many purchases obviously goes FAR beyond just students, and shows that there really is a great demand for Target and its goods. Yeah, it's true people could figure out a way to Sacramento or Vacaville once Woodland closes, and obviously they do. But having a Target is an immediate benefit to Davis, while it's effects on small stores are really questionable. Davis doesn't really have all that much in terms of variety at the ohmygodsogodly mom and pop stores. They also don't seem to be dieing from our other quaint small town mom and pop stores, like Borders/Costplus/Starbucks/Gottschalks/Safeway/Albertsons/Longs/Riteaid/etc. But I'm sure a Target would do the trick, BAM NO MORE DAVIS.	+ * Well smartass, they are closing down the Woodland target. And you missed the main point: it doesn't help Davis not to have a Target. Just last year, Target [http://www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2006/03/14/CityNews/Davis.A.Possible.Target.For.New.Target-1685983.shtml?norewrite200605231042&sourcedomain=www.californiaaggie.com reported] 270,000 purchases with a Davis zipcode. 270,000 is a lot, and that's from the three nearest targets. Gasp! People do go to shop at Target! ''Students and residents in the city who lack a Davis mailing address were omitted from the report, which tracked the income at the three closest Target locations.'' 270,000 purchases, not dollars. Just in tax dollars, thats at least 500k to 800k revenue for the city according to the article. That's a buttload of money Davis is missing out on. I think that many purchases obviously goes FAR beyond just students, and shows that there really is a great demand for Target and its goods. Yeah, it's true people could figure out a way to Sacramento or Vacaville once Woodland closes, and obviously they do. But having a Target is an immediate benefit to Davis, while it's effects on small stores are really questionable. Davis doesn't really have all that much in terms of variety at the ohmygodsogodly mom and pop stores. They also don't seem to be dieing from our other quaint small town mom and pop stores, like Borders/Costplus/Starbucks/Gottschalks/Safeway/Albertsons/Longs/Riteaid/etc. But I'm sure a Target would do the trick, BAM NO MORE DAVIS.

Target Debate

EdwinSaada — 2006-11-22 09:03:31

hope it wasn't on purpose. this page is a mess. horrible copy/paste job.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 14:	Line 14:
- Well, ever since they put in Cost Plus, that whole idea is out the door. And plus a Target out by 24-hour would be an area that would not be in the middle of town. And also, Davis is not actually small. It has too few stores to serve its population that exceeds 50,000. - JaimeRaba	+ Well, ever since they put in Cost Plus, that whole idea is out the door. And plus a Target out by 24-hour would be an area that would not be in the middle of town. And also, Davis is not actually small. It has too few stores to serve its population that exceeds 50,000. - JaimeRaba

Target Debate

EdwinSaada — 2006-11-22 08:58:01

my comment was pasted twice onto two different spots?

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 102:	Line 102:
- * Aren't they closing that Target and mall down? I'm pretty sure I heard its going to become a walmart superstore. And it can be hard depending how much you plan to buy, or even if its not much, how hard it is to move it. (ex: 24 or 48 packs of toilet paper are a hassle when your hands are full). -["EdwinSaada" ES]	+

Target Debate

EdwinSaada — 2006-11-22 08:57:11

who copy pasted this? They ruined it. comments all misaligned and stuff.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 52:	Line 52:
- Aren't they closing that Target and mall down? I'm pretty sure I heard its going to become a walmart superstore. And it can be hard depending how much you plan to buy, or even if its not much, how hard it is to move it. (ex: 24 or 48 packs of toilet paper are a hassle when your hands are full). -ES	+

Target Debate

NickSchmalenberger — 2006-11-11 08:52:24

Revert to version 90 (spam).

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
- http://sinatra.150m.com/index.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0001.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0002.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0003.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0004.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0005.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0006.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0007.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0008.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0009.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0010.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0011.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0012.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0013.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0014.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0015.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0016.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0017.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0018.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0019.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0020.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0021.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0022.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0023.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0024.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0025.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0026.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0027.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0028.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0029.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0030.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0031.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0032.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0033.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0034.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0035.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0036.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0037.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0038.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0039.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0040.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0041.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0042.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0043.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0044.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0045.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0046.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0047.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0048.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0049.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0050.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0051.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0052.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0053.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0054.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0055.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0056.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0057.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0058.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0059.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0060.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0061.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0062.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0063.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0064.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0065.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0066.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0067.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0068.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0069.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0070.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0071.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0072.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0073.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0074.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0075.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0076.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0077.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0078.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0079.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0080.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0081.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0082.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0083.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0084.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0085.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0086.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0087.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0088.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0089.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0090.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0091.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0092.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0093.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0094.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0095.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0096.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0097.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0098.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0099.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0100.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0101.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0102.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0103.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0104.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0105.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0106.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0107.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0108.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0109.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0110.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0111.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0112.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0113.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0114.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0115.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0116.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0117.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0118.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0119.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0120.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0121.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0122.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0123.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0124.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0125.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0126.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0127.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0128.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0129.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0130.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0131.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0132.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0133.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0134.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0135.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0136.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0137.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0138.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0139.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0140.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0141.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0142.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0143.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0144.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0145.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0146.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0147.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0148.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0149.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0150.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0151.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0152.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0153.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0154.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0155.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0156.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0157.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0158.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0159.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0160.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0161.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0162.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0163.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0164.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0165.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0166.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0167.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0168.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0169.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0170.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0171.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0172.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0173.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0174.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0175.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0176.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0177.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0178.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0179.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0180.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0181.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0182.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0183.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0184.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0185.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0186.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0187.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0188.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0189.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0190.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0191.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0192.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0193.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0194.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0195.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0196.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0197.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0198.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0199.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0200.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0201.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0202.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0203.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0204.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0205.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0206.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0207.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0208.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0209.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0210.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0211.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0212.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0213.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0214.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0215.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0216.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0217.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0218.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0219.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0220.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0221.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0222.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0223.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0224.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0225.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0226.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0227.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0228.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0229.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0230.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0231.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0232.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0233.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0234.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0235.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0236.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0237.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0238.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0239.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0240.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0241.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0242.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0243.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0244.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0245.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0246.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0247.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0248.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0249.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0250.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0251.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0253.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0254.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0255.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0256.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0257.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0258.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0259.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0260.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0261.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0262.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0263.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0264.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0265.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0266.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0267.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0268.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0269.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0270.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0271.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0272.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0273.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0274.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0275.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0276.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0277.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0278.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0279.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0280.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0281.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0282.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0283.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0284.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0285.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0286.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0287.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0288.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0289.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0290.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0291.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0292.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0293.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0294.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0295.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0296.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0297.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0298.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0299.html - http://sinatra.150m.com/home0300.html -

Target Debate

JohnnySmith — 2006-11-11 08:38:21

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+ http://sinatra.150m.com/index.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0001.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0002.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0003.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0004.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0005.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0006.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0007.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0008.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0009.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0010.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0011.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0012.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0013.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0014.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0015.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0016.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0017.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0018.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0019.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0020.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0021.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0022.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0023.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0024.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0025.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0026.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0027.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0028.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0029.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0030.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0031.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0032.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0033.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0034.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0035.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0036.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0037.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0038.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0039.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0040.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0041.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0042.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0043.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0044.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0045.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0046.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0047.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0048.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0049.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0050.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0051.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0052.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0053.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0054.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0055.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0056.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0057.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0058.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0059.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0060.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0061.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0062.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0063.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0064.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0065.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0066.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0067.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0068.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0069.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0070.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0071.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0072.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0073.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0074.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0075.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0076.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0077.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0078.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0079.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0080.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0081.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0082.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0083.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0084.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0085.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0086.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0087.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0088.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0089.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0090.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0091.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0092.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0093.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0094.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0095.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0096.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0097.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0098.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0099.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0100.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0101.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0102.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0103.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0104.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0105.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0106.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0107.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0108.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0109.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0110.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0111.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0112.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0113.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0114.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0115.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0116.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0117.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0118.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0119.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0120.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0121.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0122.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0123.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0124.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0125.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0126.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0127.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0128.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0129.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0130.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0131.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0132.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0133.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0134.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0135.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0136.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0137.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0138.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0139.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0140.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0141.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0142.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0143.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0144.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0145.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0146.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0147.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0148.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0149.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0150.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0151.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0152.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0153.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0154.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0155.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0156.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0157.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0158.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0159.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0160.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0161.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0162.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0163.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0164.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0165.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0166.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0167.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0168.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0169.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0170.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0171.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0172.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0173.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0174.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0175.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0176.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0177.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0178.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0179.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0180.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0181.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0182.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0183.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0184.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0185.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0186.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0187.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0188.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0189.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0190.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0191.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0192.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0193.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0194.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0195.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0196.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0197.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0198.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0199.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0200.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0201.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0202.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0203.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0204.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0205.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0206.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0207.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0208.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0209.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0210.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0211.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0212.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0213.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0214.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0215.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0216.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0217.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0218.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0219.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0220.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0221.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0222.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0223.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0224.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0225.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0226.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0227.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0228.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0229.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0230.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0231.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0232.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0233.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0234.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0235.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0236.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0237.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0238.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0239.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0240.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0241.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0242.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0243.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0244.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0245.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0246.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0247.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0248.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0249.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0250.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0251.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0253.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0254.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0255.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0256.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0257.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0258.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0259.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0260.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0261.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0262.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0263.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0264.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0265.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0266.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0267.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0268.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0269.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0270.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0271.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0272.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0273.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0274.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0275.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0276.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0277.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0278.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0279.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0280.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0281.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0282.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0283.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0284.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0285.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0286.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0287.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0288.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0289.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0290.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0291.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0292.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0293.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0294.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0295.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0296.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0297.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0298.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0299.html + http://sinatra.150m.com/home0300.html +

Target Debate

JoshFernandez — 2006-11-10 15:43:48

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 264:	Line 264:
	+ -- Fair that you have freakishly big/small feet? Hm. Probably not. +

Target Debate

JasonAller — 2006-11-10 10:11:39

Attribution fixs

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 203:	Line 203:
- *What does how much Target pays have anything to do with this issue anyway? If they treat their employees so badly, THEY will suffer by not getting qualified people working for them. I bet there are plenty of employers in Davis downtown that can hardly compete with Target in terms of pay, benefit, and flexibility. Should we kick them out of Davis? Or would they be afraid that Davis employers can't compete with what Target offers their employees? From job opportunity perspective, there's absolutely nothing negative about having more options in Davis especially in a small town like Davis with tens of thousands of students. If you want to oppose Target, stick to NIMBY or No Big Box in my precious little town theories and don't waste time trying to make it an union/workers' right issue. --["BY"]	+ *What does how much Target pays have anything to do with this issue anyway? If they treat their employees so badly, THEY will suffer by not getting qualified people working for them. I bet there are plenty of employers in Davis downtown that can hardly compete with Target in terms of pay, benefit, and flexibility. Should we kick them out of Davis? Or would they be afraid that Davis employers can't compete with what Target offers their employees? From job opportunity perspective, there's absolutely nothing negative about having more options in Davis especially in a small town like Davis with tens of thousands of students. If you want to oppose Target, stick to NIMBY or No Big Box in my precious little town theories and don't waste time trying to make it an union/workers' right issue. --["BrianYasmin"]
Line 206:	Line 206:
- *So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["BY"]	+ *So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["BrianYasmin"]

Target Debate

JeffWood — 2006-11-08 02:15:26

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 35:	Line 35:
	+ I am one of those people who lived in Davis, moved to Mace Ranch, and do not support Target at this location and the poorly designed and community-ill-fitting imposement of a store. Personally, it might work better out by Wildhorse or the hospital where it can better serve the central Davis core, than the freeway impulse-stoppers. --["JeffWood"]
Line 131:	Line 132:
	+ * Hey, no worries, your kids will be having to deal with Target's abuse of employees. They'll thank you for the cheap diapers and socks you got in exchange. :) ["JeffWood"]
Line 135:	Line 137:
	+ * The Planning Commission did reject the zoning change, but the Council chose to do an end-run around their own advisors for reasons of their own by putting it on the ballot. ["JeffWood"]
Line 259:	Line 262:
	+ * Target doesn't sell socks in my size. I have to drive (horror) to Sacramento to find a place for clothes. Target doesn't meet my needs in this regard. Is that fair? -- ["JeffWood"]

Target Debate

KarlMogel — 2006-11-06 22:13:10

minor link edit

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 294:	Line 294:
- A Target in Davis will not ruin the town, nor does Davis meet all of the needs of its citizens with the available stores. But the desire to meet everyone's needs does not automatically mean that Targets and Wal-Marts should move in. We should be thinking about how we can encourage more stores that would meet those needs without going against the general plan - my home town of Petaluma is busy revitalizing its interior rather than just building a bunch of giant stores. And Davisites could think about being a little more inventive with their shopping. Once you realize that those Target and Wal-Mart towels and tube-socks fall apart quickly, you'll see that you aren't saving yourself any money in the process. Thrift Stores are a great way to add interesting and sometimes (paradoxically) long-lasting clothing items to your wardrobe. You could always shop in town, or plan a carpooled trip to Woodland to shop at all the thrift stores on Main Street, and pop over to the Target on Gibson for whatever you're missing. You might also want to consider whether you're truly saving money or being [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader manipulated.]	+ A Target in Davis will not ruin the town, nor does Davis meet all of the needs of its citizens with the available stores. But the desire to meet everyone's needs does not automatically mean that Targets and Wal-Marts should move in. We should be thinking about how we can encourage more stores that would meet those needs without going against the general plan - my home town of Petaluma is busy revitalizing its interior rather than just building a bunch of giant stores. And Davisites could think about being a little more inventive with their shopping. Once you realize that those Target and Wal-Mart towels and tube-socks fall apart quickly, you'll see that you aren't saving yourself any money in the process. Thrift Stores are a great way to add interesting and sometimes (paradoxically) long-lasting clothing items to your wardrobe. You could always shop in town, or plan a carpooled trip to Woodland to shop at all the thrift stores on Main Street, and pop over to the Target on Gibson for whatever you're missing. You might also want to consider whether you're truly saving money or being [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader manipulated.] Target expects to make quite a bit of money, [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2006/10/31/news/061new1.txt take a look at this.]

Target Debate

KarlMogel — 2006-11-06 22:09:41

A few paragraphs for the undecided - a last minute evaluation of measure K.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 285:	Line 285:
	+ + -- I believe that the K/Target measure has been thoroughly greenwashed. Some of the components of the LEED certification are already required by the city, and the outskirt position of the store virtually mandates driving there anyway. The debate has been framed around whether or not this Target will be energy efficient, which it will - more so than almost all "big-box" stores. (As long as the thermostat is kept under tight control. The pro-K folks also had no idea whether something so simple such as skylights would be installed.) I particularly favor the prospect of showers for bicyclists, as someone who once rode 6 miles for a summer hardware store job. The environmental impact will not be significant, due in part to the large buffer zone they will be creating, when compared with what otherwise might be built there. Many Davisites would agree that this particular store will be better, environmentally, than most cities are being offered, and so if you agree that LEED certification is good, then it seems that the argument for Target is over? Wrong. + + This is one of the things about greenwashing - the debate has been framed around what is not the most important aspect of the Measure K issue. I believe that the strongest argument against Target is the economic one. I took some time to interview the (paid) pro-K and (volunteer) anti-K advocates at the Farmer's Market, and after inquiring about the details of the environmental arguments, I brought up the economic arguments, suggesting that they were stronger. The Pro-K folks tell us that it will bring tax revenue to the city of Davis, and in the short run there is no doubt that it will, but will it have a long-term negative or positive effect? Large retailers that don't pay their workers a living wage drain city services. It is certain that in the short-term, Davis will enjoy extra tax revenues, but where will these come from? + + We're being told that the new Target will not put locals out of business, that instead, the green Target will be Davisites that have already been shopping at the Target in Woodland. It is argued that Davis ''should'' get these tax revenues. It follows logically that if these people are no longer shopping at the Woodland Target, then building a Target in Davis should pull revenues out of Woodland. I asked the pro-K advocate at the market a direct question about this - that if the tax revenue is coming from shoppers that would have gone to Woodland otherwise, then doesn't that mean that this would have a negative effect on Woodland? He was evasive and said that we can't know that for sure. (Therefore, you can't know for sure that there would be a positive effect on Davis) + + It's simple math. If you add tax revenues to Davis that are from people no longer shopping in Woodland, then you have to be subtracting those tax revenues from Woodland. And unless you are paid to obfuscate on a simple question, there should be no problem with admitting that. The Woodland Target is on the chopping block as well, as they hope to build a bigger one on I-5, in addition to the one in Davis. (No other Target will be LEED-certified like the one in Davis. That puts a dollop of brown ink in the buckets of green paint used in the campaign.) The point is, Target is setting one city against another in a war over each other's tax revenues, and is playing the hero that will bring city tax income relief, until they have statistics on neighboring cities purchasing in their stores. Next might be Dixon, and they may tell Dixon that Davis doesn't deserve the tax revenues that they currently promise us - and so once the Davis store is in place they will forget loyalties as they have announced they will do to Woodland. I think we need to frame this issue in the context of the longer term. Measure K is a clear attempt to get around the general plan that Davis has put together, and doesn't take into account the long term effects on this community and others around them. The arguments being made are written up in terms of carbon dioxide emissions rather than the economic issues that make considering a Target-type store different from any other store. + + A Target in Davis will not ruin the town, nor does Davis meet all of the needs of its citizens with the available stores. But the desire to meet everyone's needs does not automatically mean that Targets and Wal-Marts should move in. We should be thinking about how we can encourage more stores that would meet those needs without going against the general plan - my home town of Petaluma is busy revitalizing its interior rather than just building a bunch of giant stores. And Davisites could think about being a little more inventive with their shopping. Once you realize that those Target and Wal-Mart towels and tube-socks fall apart quickly, you'll see that you aren't saving yourself any money in the process. Thrift Stores are a great way to add interesting and sometimes (paradoxically) long-lasting clothing items to your wardrobe. You could always shop in town, or plan a carpooled trip to Woodland to shop at all the thrift stores on Main Street, and pop over to the Target on Gibson for whatever you're missing. You might also want to consider whether you're truly saving money or being [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader manipulated.] + + I have less than a year left in this town, nevertheless I fell obligated to vote no on K because I don't think it will help Davis or its citizens in the long run. The environmental argument is the weakest argument for the new Target, and it is telling that the pro-K campaign decided to make that part of the central slogan (I Heart Green), when the economic issues are more pertinent. The fact that they won't do simple math that follows logically from their central economic arguments suggests to me that the Target company would like us to believe that shoppers, taxes, and income just pop out of nowhere as if by magic, and don't affect anyone except for increasing tax revenues. I decided to look into the measure K issue at first because of the environmental arguments being made, but I realized that they were a distraction. Davis is a town full of very smart people, and I don't think they they'd be fooled for a minute that this is really about the environment. + + The real true winner of the Measure K debate, however, was ["Choice Voting" Davis Choice Voting]. While I spent over an hour talking to both pro and anti-K, they offered me a chair. Something tells me no one expected anyone to want to stop and flesh out the details for or against K. Measure L is now the only ad on my lawn. + Thanks for reading and voting. -["KarlMogel"]

Target Debate

JabberWokky — 2006-11-06 18:29:29

Reply to Leighton (perspective)

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 74:	Line 74:
	+ * Many Targets (and most non-Californian Walmarts) have a separate section that it a full supermarket, roughly similar to Safeway, complete with deli, bakery, butcher and produce section and row upon row of everything from apple chips to frozen waffles. They are ''not'' mini supermarkets, but rather large, full service supermarkets with sprouts, fresh herbs, a variety of imported cheeses, seafood, a full selection of soups and sauces, etc. Of course, this one is a pretty small store (compared to the national sizes), so I can't say it will have such a grocery inside it. But it isn't likely the "Snackwells and string cheese aisle" you're picturing. --["JabberWokky"]

Target Debate

LeightonHinkley — 2006-11-06 15:56:19

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 73:	Line 73:
	+ * Who in their right mind goes grocery shopping at Target? I imagine it would be convenient, if your diet consisted largely of Snackwells and string cheese...and if that was the case, your life expectancy would probably precede the Second Street Crossing completion date. ["LeightonHinkley"]

Target Debate

StevenDaubert — 2006-10-31 19:43:34

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 281:	Line 281:
	+ oh and howcome the council still pushes the issue on the voters when all the committes save the development one disprove of the idea? + I look at people on the don't big box site and I see Sue Greenwald, Julie Partansky, Ken Wagstaff, Mike Harrington, Stan Forbes and Lamar Heystek. All these people represent the values that I see in Davis and have been demonstrating there view thru politics for some time. I would trust them quicker then I would trust Puntillo.

Target Debate

StevenDaubert — 2006-10-31 19:40:16

Differences for Target Debate

No differences found!

Target Debate

StevenDaubert — 2006-10-31 19:40:13

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 271:	Line 271:
- Culture is married to diversity and their souls have been stolen by the Targets and Walmarts of our day. The acts that shape you as an individual are actively being traded out for conformity by those that pander to the lowest common denominator. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]	+ Culture is married to diversity and their souls have been stolen by the Targets and Walmarts of our day. The acts that shape you as an individual are actively being traded out for conformity by those that pander to the lowest common denominator. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- + ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] + + I like to look at th 3 smaller keywords on the campaign signs + + preserve our community, neighborhoods and downtown Vs. Choice. Funds for davis and sustainability + + funds for davis is $2 per person, not that great in the grand scheme of things, choice on where to shop? go down poleline and go to that target when the close the CFM location to move it next to the costco that will be there. + Can someone tell me what sustainability means in the sense of target, that it won't close? + My first instinct was to vote against it and I'm not going to second guess myself. Even if target panders to Davis with it's leed building --["StevenDaubert"]

Target Debate

SharlaDaly — 2006-10-31 19:23:47

Riding the bus to Woodland

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 114:	Line 114:
	+ + The problem of riding the bus to Target in Woodland is that the bus winds around in Davis before heading up to Woodland. If you ride your bike to the last stop in Davis before it heads out of town (or take unitrans), then catch the bus for the 10 miles to the first stop in Woodland (you can even take your bike on the bus), the trip is actually much shorter than an hour ride. This seems doable since you would consider riding all the way out to Mace Ranch to shop at the Target there. - ["SharlaDaly"]

Target Debate

ChristopherMckenzie — 2006-10-31 18:21:45

ok, last time. I swears it...

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 269:	Line 269:
- Culture is married to diversity and they both get starved at the hands of the commodity. The souls of Dixon and Woodland have been stolen underfoot by the Targets and Walmarts of our days. The acts that would give you individuality through the places you go and live, and the things you consume are actively being traded out for conformity through those that pander to the lowest common denominator. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]	+ Culture is married to diversity and their souls have been stolen by the Targets and Walmarts of our day. The acts that shape you as an individual are actively being traded out for conformity by those that pander to the lowest common denominator. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]

Target Debate

ChristopherMckenzie — 2006-10-31 18:14:50

rephrasing...

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 267:	Line 267:
- In those 2 Safeways, Nuggets, Rite-Aids, Longs or Albertsons that I have imagined existing here in Davis, I have envisioned an entire Aisle dedicated to soda and another to chips. I dream of a Safeway that dedicates more shelf space to the Coca Cola Company then to all of Africa, India, and the Middle East combined. I dream of a Davis where local character and flair, diversity and the dreams, intrigue and uniqueness are lost because we offer the exact same on streets with different names then the next town over. - The souls of Dixon and woodland have been stolen underfoot by the Targets and Walmarts of our days. Our own culture has been snatched, rebranded, and sold for profit in the name of the free market. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]	+ In those 2 Safeways, Nuggets, Rite-Aids, Longs and Albertsons that I have imagined existing here in Davis, I have envisioned an entire aisle dedicated to soda and another to chips. I dream of a Safeway that dedicates more shelf space to the Coca-Cola Company then to all of Africa, India, and the Middle East combined. I dream of a Davis where local character and flair, diversity and the dreams, intrigue and uniqueness are lost because we offer the exact same on streets with different names then the next town over. + + Culture is married to diversity and they both get starved at the hands of the commodity. The souls of Dixon and Woodland have been stolen underfoot by the Targets and Walmarts of our days. The acts that would give you individuality through the places you go and live, and the things you consume are actively being traded out for conformity through those that pander to the lowest common denominator. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]

Target Debate

ChristopherMckenzie — 2006-10-31 15:17:33

Maybe ChristopherMcKenzie vs. SteveOstrowski?

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 248:	Line 248:
	+ * Clearly Target exists to build churches and homeless shelters - I am sure it is not done for public relations to do one upmanship on WalMart in the slightest. Also, after much thought, I am going to refrain from criticizing you using peer pressure as your central argument to support this legislation. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]

Target Debate

ChristopherMckenzie — 2006-10-31 15:02:37

ok, christophermckenzie vs. corporate america.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 259:	Line 259:
	+ * Oh give me a break. I think their "I heart Target, oh boy! Gush with happiness lolz!1" signs are completely ridiculous. I am trying to mock their campaign practices with analysis of the production process. You don't claim to love the environment and steamroll fields with asphalt and erect large shopping centers. Come on. I'm just waiting for Westfield to buy it out... -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"] +
Line 263:	Line 265:
	+ * Other corporate stores will not enter Davis? I hate having to travel to East Bay to go to Albertsons, Safeway, The dollar store, Rite-Aid, Cost Plus Worldmart, or a liquidating tower records. Traversing the causeway for a McDonald's, an In-N-Out, a KFC, a Dairy Queen, or an AM/PM has taken a toll on me. + In those 2 Safeways, Nuggets, Rite-Aids, Longs or Albertsons that I have imagined existing here in Davis, I have envisioned an entire Aisle dedicated to soda and another to chips. I dream of a Safeway that dedicates more shelf space to the Coca Cola Company then to all of Africa, India, and the Middle East combined. I dream of a Davis where local character and flair, diversity and the dreams, intrigue and uniqueness are lost because we offer the exact same on streets with different names then the next town over. + The souls of Dixon and woodland have been stolen underfoot by the Targets and Walmarts of our days. Our own culture has been snatched, rebranded, and sold for profit in the name of the free market. I will not be silent to fanboyism for a company who only wishes to profit from your foolishness. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]

Target Debate

EdwinSaada — 2006-10-31 13:21:29

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 262:	Line 262:
	+ * Why can't you say that? It makes sense, especially in the context he uses.

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-10-31 13:15:12

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 260:	Line 260:
	+ + Well the deal is that if this fails other corporate stores will not want to run the chance of trying to enter Davis and it will be years before Target or other stores will try. Also your argument is about size, a store that is on the eastern side not hurting anyone within most of the city. Bigger size means more products and more availability. It's like you can't say that I will disapprove of this large store but approve of another smaller one. This is it, whether or not to have a Target in Davis, not a debate over it's size. The debate over its size was dealt with a long time ago when the city send this development to the voters. --["SteveOstrowski"]

Target Debate

AlexPomeranz — 2006-10-31 13:03:39

Forgot to attribute comment to myself

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 259:	Line 259:
- I am not against the idea of having a Target store in Davis. I am against the idea of having a 137,000 square foot Target store in Davis. I recognize that Davis residents need some of the things that Target can provide, and I also recognize that a lot of tax revenue bleeds to other cities when people have to go elsewhere to get these items. But that doesn't mean we need to start bringing in overly-huge megastores. We have successfully integrated many reasonably-sized chain stores in Davis -- Cost Plus, Borders, Dollar Tree, etc... I would much rather see a reasonably-sized (eg. 80,000 sq ft) Target with a couple of smaller stores next to it than an enormous Target with only one other store. I will be voting NO on K.	+ I am not against the idea of having a Target store in Davis. I am against the idea of having a 137,000 square foot Target store in Davis. I recognize that Davis residents need some of the things that Target can provide, and I also recognize that a lot of tax revenue bleeds to other cities when people have to go elsewhere to get these items. But that doesn't mean we need to start bringing in overly-huge megastores. We have successfully integrated many reasonably-sized chain stores in Davis -- Cost Plus, Borders, Dollar Tree, etc... I would much rather see a reasonably-sized (eg. 80,000 sq ft) Target with a couple of smaller stores next to it than an enormous Target with only one other store. I will be voting NO on K. --["AlexPomeranz"]

Target Debate

AlexPomeranz — 2006-10-31 13:03:10

Comment about why I am voting No on K

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 258:	Line 258:
	+ + I am not against the idea of having a Target store in Davis. I am against the idea of having a 137,000 square foot Target store in Davis. I recognize that Davis residents need some of the things that Target can provide, and I also recognize that a lot of tax revenue bleeds to other cities when people have to go elsewhere to get these items. But that doesn't mean we need to start bringing in overly-huge megastores. We have successfully integrated many reasonably-sized chain stores in Davis -- Cost Plus, Borders, Dollar Tree, etc... I would much rather see a reasonably-sized (eg. 80,000 sq ft) Target with a couple of smaller stores next to it than an enormous Target with only one other store. I will be voting NO on K.

Target Debate

LeightonHinkley — 2006-10-31 12:45:19

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 69:	Line 69:
- My sarcasm detector just flew right off the scale on that one. At least, I hope its sarcasm. - AlexGarbutt	+ * My sarcasm detector just flew right off the scale on that one. At least, I hope its sarcasm. - AlexGarbutt

Target Debate

LeightonHinkley — 2006-10-31 12:44:06

I've decided correct my grammar this page.

Differences for Target Debate

No differences found!

Target Debate

LeightonHinkley — 2006-10-31 12:43:06

I've decided correct my grammar this page.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 66:	Line 66:
- Putting a Target in Davis would put a lot the local stores that supply similar goods out of business, namely mom and pops like Ace Hardware, Longs Drugs, The Gap and Office Max. LeightonHinkley	+ + Putting a Target in Davis would put a lot of the local stores that supply similar goods out of business, namely mom and pops like Ace Hardware, Longs Drugs, The Gap and Office Max. ["LeightonHinkley"]

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-10-31 12:13:41

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 255:	Line 255:
	+ + The proposed Target in Davis has nothing to do with other corporate practices in Third World countries. That's like saying that every employee of Target is somehow supportive of child labor. --["SteveOstrowski"]

Target Debate

ChristopherMckenzie — 2006-10-31 10:10:51

a comment - at the bottom.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 253:	Line 253:
	+ + For the love of god, someone make an "I <3 Child Labor" sign to put around town. We need them to defeat this unquestioning senseless corporate jingoism. -- ["ChristopherMcKenzie"]

Target Debate

JoshFernandez — 2006-10-31 09:05:05

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 251:	Line 251:
	+ + If I see any of you anti-Target people there shopping for so much as a battery, I'm calling the police. It's like the vegans who wear leather belts and give you the "It's already dead and I'm not wasteful" excuse. It's like being a militant athiest then banging on the gates of heaven with tears in your eyes. It's like shaving your head and getting an SS tattoo, then seeing a hot Jew. You're gonna be bummed out when you need a tubesock. -- ["JoshFernandez"]

Target Debate

AnthonySoto — 2006-10-30 22:47:04

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 125:	Line 125:
	+ * "I much prefer Wal-Mart." Is that because they are more shameless about their awful business practices? Just wondering. [AnthonySoto]

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-10-27 15:37:30

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 173:	Line 173:
- [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJZHSfzDOg Gotcha!]	+ [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJZHSfzDOg No on Measure K supporter stealing a Target sign.]

Target Debate

TusharRawat — 2006-10-26 23:22:55

wow i'm tired of this... enough replying to comments

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 12:	Line 12:
	+ * Right... that's why Folsom, which is still a small town, has a Target, Wal-Mart, Kohls, WinCo, had a Food Source and a former K-Mart where the Kohls is. Oh, and I completely forgot to mention Borders, Home Depot, and CostCo. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]
Line 16:	Line 17:
	+ * I respect and admire you, Philip, but I'm tired of paying "club prices" for food items at Safeway and Albertson's that are standard prices at big box retailers. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]
Line 39:	Line 41:
	+ * Agreed --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]
Line 91:	Line 94:
	+ * Let's see... it makes much sense for me to bike or walk 10+ miles to the nearest Wal-Mart or Target, then carry, say 3 bags worth of necessities back 10 more miles on my bike. Yup, a Target in Davis is SUCH a bad thing...
Line 93:	Line 97:
	+ * No, but it is inconvenient. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]
Line 119:	Line 124:
	+ * Dude. Don't play the sweatshop card. If you're that concerned about illegal sweatshop labor, go shut down the oversea factories yourself. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]
Line 122:	Line 128:
	+ * They could just as easily use an existing building or create an add-on to an existing building than build a completely new one. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]
Line 127:	Line 134:
	+ * DudeNude, please show some decency. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat] P.S. Where's the first Target? First Wal-Mart? They're not within 10 miles of me.
Line 132:	Line 140:
	+ * I'm not lazy. I'm busy. I would also rather ride my bike or walk, but not 10+ miles. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]
Line 133:	Line 142:
	+ * Oh, please. Not this again. You are not that concerned about the injustice or unfair labor practices if all you do is complain.
Line 192:	Line 202:
	+ * Davis is special and unique because it has stores like Borders, Jamba Juice, Albersons, Safeway... etc. --["TusharRawat" T. Rawat]

Target Debate

JasonAller — 2006-10-26 19:51:55

spelling

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 21:	Line 21:
- I find it wonderfully ironic that people in Mace Ranch are concerned about their quality of life being adversely affected by the building of a Target when they live in what is easily the ugliest, most unwanted developement ever to be foisted on the city of Davis. I only wish it were a Walmart or something even more heinous - an adult superstore, prison, feedlot, - something like that. PaulThober	+ I find it wonderfully ironic that people in Mace Ranch are concerned about their quality of life being adversely affected by the building of a Target when they live in what is easily the ugliest, most unwanted development ever to be foisted on the city of Davis. I only wish it were a Walmart or something even more heinous - an adult superstore, prison, feedlot, - something like that. PaulThober
Line 28:	Line 28:
- Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly developement forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"]	+ Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predecessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly development forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"]
Line 57:	Line 57:
- Okay, this really needs to be on its own page by now. However, a few thoughts. I agree that people are consumeristic to disgusting proportions. But you can't BOTH say that "hey waste fuel and drive to woodland," but also don't build a target nearby because of how it causes 3rd world countries to underpay and otherwise exploit their employees. Pick one. The fact of the matter is that Davis is a town that sells a lot of trinkets ("gifts!"), food and little else... there's really no DIRECT competition with Target. Their buggest direct competition would be with big chains like Rite Aid and Longs (and Grocery stores to some extent)-- didn't you notice? Davisites "import" just about everything. Target is a much better choice than Walmart beacuse they tend to care a bit more about impact upon 3rd world countries--as well as greater selectivity in choosing its merchandise. They're not perfect however. But I think Target would be a good fit for Davis. But it just needs to be put in the right spot. --JaimeRaba	+ Okay, this really needs to be on its own page by now. However, a few thoughts. I agree that people are consumeristic to disgusting proportions. But you can't BOTH say that "hey waste fuel and drive to woodland," but also don't build a target nearby because of how it causes 3rd world countries to underpay and otherwise exploit their employees. Pick one. The fact of the matter is that Davis is a town that sells a lot of trinkets ("gifts!"), food and little else... there's really no DIRECT competition with Target. Their biggest direct competition would be with big chains like Rite Aid and Longs (and Grocery stores to some extent)-- didn't you notice? Davisites "import" just about everything. Target is a much better choice than Walmart because they tend to care a bit more about impact upon 3rd world countries--as well as greater selectivity in choosing its merchandise. They're not perfect however. But I think Target would be a good fit for Davis. But it just needs to be put in the right spot. --JaimeRaba
Line 68:	Line 68:
- * Rediculous. I dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at rediculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they wernt planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["MattHh"]	+ * Rediculous. I dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at ridiculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they weren't planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["MattHh"]
Line 76:	Line 76:
- I would be completely against a target, if it didn't have a niche in this market. Some things don't need to be high quality, they can just be cheap. Unfortunately there's nowhere in davis that gets nowhere near this kind of goods. Ace gets close, and the products are high quality, but generally a good deal more expensive. My concerns about these buisnesses are less their global effect, eventually their business practices will turn around and bite them in the ass as places unionize, but more the damage they do to american communities. 10 years ago, a target would have been awful in davis, and would have retarded severly the growth of downtown. Today though, Dowtown is a different place, and can stand independant of the cheap wares of target. I would rather shop at a local business, but unless one can fill the niche that target is filling, I don't see why capitilism can't just take it's course here. Char George - - I am still undecided about whether or not I would want a Target in Davis. I think that it would dramatically change the town, and may create a "broken window" effect that would make it easier for other big box stores to come to town. I really don't want this to happen. On the other hand, I think that Davis is losing a lot of tax revenue from people who go to stores like Target in other towns. My biggest gripe is the cost of clothing currently available in Davis. Last night I was walking around places downtown and it almost put me over the edge. All the clothing stores in town other than Gottschalks are "Boutiques" that sell only $90 tank tops and $300 jeans. I understand that the Naked Thread is all organic or sustainable, therefore worth their price, but at most of these places, the only reason behind the price is the brand. It's rediculous. Also, most stores in Davis don't sell my size (XL-XXL). Whether it's at Target or not, I'd love to be able to shop for clothes in Davis and find something in my size that I can actually afford. -Janelle	+ I would be completely against a target, if it didn't have a niche in this market. Some things don't need to be high quality, they can just be cheap. Unfortunately there's nowhere in Davis that gets nowhere near this kind of goods. Ace gets close, and the products are high quality, but generally a good deal more expensive. My concerns about these businesses are less their global effect, eventually their business practices will turn around and bite them in the ass as places unionize, but more the damage they do to American communities. 10 years ago, a target would have been awful in davis, and would have retarded severely the growth of downtown. Today though, Downtown is a different place, and can stand independent of the cheap wares of target. I would rather shop at a local business, but unless one can fill the niche that target is filling, I don't see why capitalism can't just take it's course here. Char George + + I am still undecided about whether or not I would want a Target in Davis. I think that it would dramatically change the town, and may create a "broken window" effect that would make it easier for other big box stores to come to town. I really don't want this to happen. On the other hand, I think that Davis is losing a lot of tax revenue from people who go to stores like Target in other towns. My biggest gripe is the cost of clothing currently available in Davis. Last night I was walking around places downtown and it almost put me over the edge. All the clothing stores in town other than Gottschalks are "Boutiques" that sell only $90 tank tops and $300 jeans. I understand that the Naked Thread is all organic or sustainable, therefore worth their price, but at most of these places, the only reason behind the price is the brand. It's ridiculous. Also, most stores in Davis don't sell my size (XL-XXL). Whether it's at Target or not, I'd love to be able to shop for clothes in Davis and find something in my size that I can actually afford. -Janelle
Line 86:	Line 86:
- You know all i got to say is that the Target Corp moving to davis is a horrible idea. there are 3 Targets within 18 miles of downotown Davis. They are probably going to close the Woodland one soon (Woodland Democract said that)... Have you thought about what that is going ot do to the people who depend on those jobs... are you now going to be happy cause you can buy your crappy free trade imported crap and cheap proces so someone making not even a living wage can drive form woodland, davis, west sac, dixon or somehwere else and seel it to you. their labor practices are horrible. they are building it next to a god damn EPA Superfund site. that's right, we can now buy some crappy crap right next to one of the most toxic clean up sites for a hundred mile radius. Big box stores suck, and if you went to the city coucli meetings, you woudl know that the tax revenue that we woudl get from the TArget does not add up becuase of increase in law inforcement, zoneing changes, etc... we would make between 40,-70,000 dollars as a city, which means nothing with the ammount of new traffic lights, cops, security, and cultural lameness that comes along with a Target. Poeple need jobs, but not ones that keep you down, selling crap, not having medical or dental (full time only and they limit the number of those), and NO living wage. Think about what you REALLY need, WHERE all the imported consumer crap (all that GMO and corporate food and plants too) comes from, and if this is comehting that will actually benefit us as a town or community in any way... by the way if you need a can opener, borrow a neighbors or go to ace, or use a knife. dont be lazy, be creative... - ["CompostNolan" blessings...]	+ You know all i got to say is that the Target Corp moving to davis is a horrible idea. there are 3 Targets within 18 miles of downtown Davis. They are probably going to close the Woodland one soon (Woodland Democract said that)... Have you thought about what that is going to do to the people who depend on those jobs... are you now going to be happy cause you can buy your crappy free trade imported crap and cheap process so someone making not even a living wage can drive form woodland, davis, west sac, dixon or somewhere else and sell it to you. their labor practices are horrible. they are building it next to a god damn EPA Superfund site. that's right, we can now buy some crappy crap right next to one of the most toxic clean up sites for a hundred mile radius. Big box stores suck, and if you went to the city council meetings, you woudl know that the tax revenue that we would get from the TArget does not add up because of increase in law enforcement, zoneing changes, etc... we would make between 40,-70,000 dollars as a city, which means nothing with the ammount of new traffic lights, cops, security, and cultural lameness that comes along with a Target. People need jobs, but not ones that keep you down, selling crap, not having medical or dental (full time only and they limit the number of those), and NO living wage. Think about what you REALLY need, WHERE all the imported consumer crap (all that GMO and corporate food and plants too) comes from, and if this is something that will actually benefit us as a town or community in any way... by the way if you need a can opener, borrow a neighbors or go to ace, or use a knife. don't be lazy, be creative... - ["CompostNolan" blessings...]
Line 90:	Line 90:
- * this is a poor argument. first of all most places in davis are several miles away from the davis proposed target location. if you live in north davis the davis location will actually be slower to get to than the woodland location (according to mapquest). first of all a lot of people working at target would take the bus from woodland (no added polution). also since the target is now in town, people will no longer do the occassional bulk buying trip (saving time and gas). now people will go to target every month or several times a month for that matter, actually this increases the polution because most of these people will be driving cars for 5 miles or so. how many people are going to seriously bike merchandise from target. i rairly see anyone doing that from a safeway thats only 1 mile or less away.	+ * this is a poor argument. first of all most places in davis are several miles away from the davis proposed target location. if you live in north davis the davis location will actually be slower to get to than the woodland location (according to mapquest). first of all a lot of people working at target would take the bus from woodland (no added pollution). also since the target is now in town, people will no longer do the occassional bulk buying trip (saving time and gas). now people will go to target every month or several times a month for that matter, actually this increases the polution because most of these people will be driving cars for 5 miles or so. how many people are going to seriously bike merchandise from target. i rairly see anyone doing that from a safeway thats only 1 mile or less away.
Line 99:	Line 99:
- *Well if you bothered to read his page (or even bothered to consider that other people might be in a different living situation than you) you'd know that Dan is only going to be in Davis until next month. With that in mind, I don't find it wasteful at all that he's buying an air mattress instead of an expensive conventional mattress that he wouldnt be able to bring with him anyways. Please try to consider that other people may have different needs than your own before accusing them of "wasteful consumerism." - EyadDarras	+ *Well if you bothered to read his page (or even bothered to consider that other people might be in a different living situation than you) you'd know that Dan is only going to be in Davis until next month. With that in mind, I don't find it wasteful at all that he's buying an air mattress instead of an expensive conventional mattress that he wouldn't be able to bring with him anyways. Please try to consider that other people may have different needs than your own before accusing them of "wasteful consumerism." - EyadDarras
Line 107:	Line 107:
- I initially started to read this page as a Yes on K voter and after reading the "Considerations" section further down, I have changed my mind. I have a suggestion for those that feel greatly affected by the transporation issue. Maybe a solution would be to create a ride-share program if unable to find a friend to car pool with (maybe even on wiki) for those that have the occasional desire to shop at Target since the route to the new Target though city streets would probably burn almost the same amount of gas as going to Woodland on hte highway (and the slight difference would be negligble if people car pooled anyway). I have to say that I have and probably will engage in Target shopping elsewhere and in the past I was able to share rides with friends since I didn't own a car. The idea of a store that is as large as two football fields is scary to me. I come from San Jose which is a prime example of poor city planning with huge chains and franchises wiping out any character or creativity. I originally was under the impression it was going to be a regular store and NOT an "Oh my god! I'm a huge consumering American" store. Foolish me. Heather Witt	+ I initially started to read this page as a Yes on K voter and after reading the "Considerations" section further down, I have changed my mind. I have a suggestion for those that feel greatly affected by the transportation issue. Maybe a solution would be to create a ride-share program if unable to find a friend to car pool with (maybe even on wiki) for those that have the occasional desire to shop at Target since the route to the new Target though city streets would probably burn almost the same amount of gas as going to Woodland on hte highway (and the slight difference would be negligble if people car pooled anyway). I have to say that I have and probably will engage in Target shopping elsewhere and in the past I was able to share rides with friends since I didn't own a car. The idea of a store that is as large as two football fields is scary to me. I come from San Jose which is a prime example of poor city planning with huge chains and franchises wiping out any character or creativity. I originally was under the impression it was going to be a regular store and NOT an "Oh my god! I'm a huge consumering American" store. Foolish me. Heather Witt
Line 138:	Line 138:
- *Stupid#3: See point #2 as to the cost, but again, this doesn't take into account the global cost or Stupid#4, and I don't say its a program for the poor, only thing in that area is #2 and slightly increased employment(debateable-- Want stats).	+ *Stupid#3: See point #2 as to the cost, but again, this doesn't take into account the global cost or Stupid#4, and I don't say its a program for the poor, only thing in that area is #2 and slightly increased employment(debatable-- Want stats).
Line 141:	Line 141:
- Lazy: It all comes down to cost and convenience. You'd be suprised how many people of all backgrounds exhibit these qualities, and how America seems to support these qualities in its populace. Maybe this is just laziness by another name, but it is packaged and sold thoughout the country. Is Davis really that different? - Low class: You'd be suprised how many middle class people do that as well, or do you mean class in terms of "classy" as opposed to economics? Beyond that, some people aren't informed and don't know of the troubles of target, and others it is a choice between a rock and a hard place, with target giving people what they need. We should think about and consider everybody, but traditionally, only the rich or upper-middle class have had that luxury, and if being lower class means looking out for yourself because you can't afford to not shop at Target, then there are even greater problems of inequity in America than just one Target in Davis. What would you be willing to sacrifice for us all to be on equal ground, and not exploiting foreign workers? What have you sacrificed so far? --["MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis] ''PS: I agree with considering the broader implications, but, I'd like to ask you to consider the concepts I pose at the end, which are those of even broader implications than Davis, Ca. I feel they get closer to the root of the matter, but may not be the right thing for a local wiki.''	+ Lazy: It all comes down to cost and convenience. You'd be surprised how many people of all backgrounds exhibit these qualities, and how America seems to support these qualities in its populace. Maybe this is just laziness by another name, but it is packaged and sold thoughout the country. Is Davis really that different? + Low class: You'd be surprised how many middle class people do that as well, or do you mean class in terms of "classy" as opposed to economics? Beyond that, some people aren't informed and don't know of the troubles of target, and others it is a choice between a rock and a hard place, with target giving people what they need. We should think about and consider everybody, but traditionally, only the rich or upper-middle class have had that luxury, and if being lower class means looking out for yourself because you can't afford to not shop at Target, then there are even greater problems of inequity in America than just one Target in Davis. What would you be willing to sacrifice for us all to be on equal ground, and not exploiting foreign workers? What have you sacrificed so far? --["MaxMikalonis" Max Mikalonis] ''PS: I agree with considering the broader implications, but, I'd like to ask you to consider the concepts I pose at the end, which are those of even broader implications than Davis, Ca. I feel they get closer to the root of the matter, but may not be the right thing for a local wiki.''
Line 183:	Line 183:
- * One of the Councilmen kept asking Dewes what the lowest income wage set could be. Tellingly Dewes answered at first by talking about their benefit package. When asked again he kept glancing back at his boss/comerades while saying that he couldn't answer due to the many different starting types. As he was continued to be grilled into answering the question that was the answer he gave over and over and over again. The man looked enermously flustered. Unfortunately the Councilman running that inqusition gave up rather than forcing him to give a non-B.S. answer. --["JosephBleckman"]	+ * One of the Councilmen kept asking Dewes what the lowest income wage set could be. Tellingly Dewes answered at first by talking about their benefit package. When asked again he kept glancing back at his boss/comerades while saying that he couldn't answer due to the many different starting types. As he was continued to be grilled into answering the question that was the answer he gave over and over and over again. The man looked enormously flustered. Unfortunately the Councilman running that inquisition gave up rather than forcing him to give a non-B.S. answer. --["JosephBleckman"]
Line 188:	Line 188:
- I said it wasn't* a downtown Davis Labor issue and I didn't say I had a problem with 80% of the workers coming from Dixon and Woodland. Personally, I'd prefer an employer that paid good wages and benefits, but OTOH, if we run all the busnesses out of town that pay minimum wage, there wouldn't be a lot of restaurants, hotels and movie theaters left.	+ I said it wasn't* a downtown Davis Labor issue and I didn't say I had a problem with 80% of the workers coming from Dixon and Woodland. Personally, I'd prefer an employer that paid good wages and benefits, but OTOH, if we run all the businesses out of town that pay minimum wage, there wouldn't be a lot of restaurants, hotels and movie theaters left.
Line 218:	Line 218:
- As Target sells virtually everything including groceries, pharmacy, general merchandise and garden items, many stores will be directly affected. But the draw of customer traffic will threaten even non-competetive, non-retail businesses. Restaurants will struggle as adjacent shops close; malls will lose their anchors and the small shops will follow; every shopping area will suffer as customer traffic is diverted to the freeway. "One-stop shopping" doesn't leave much room, or money, for anyone else. And as the smaller shops close, everything we were promised by Measure K proponents fades away. Consumer choice is gone as Big-Box is our only option for many goods. Convenience is gone as we can no longer walk or bike to Longs or Rite-Aid or ACE, now closed. Sales tax revenue and jobs are gone as the deceased shops produced more in sum than the Big-Box does. Worst of all, Davis' unique character, quality of life and small-town charm is gone, irretrivably.	+ As Target sells virtually everything including groceries, pharmacy, general merchandise and garden items, many stores will be directly affected. But the draw of customer traffic will threaten even non-competitive, non-retail businesses. Restaurants will struggle as adjacent shops close; malls will lose their anchors and the small shops will follow; every shopping area will suffer as customer traffic is diverted to the freeway. "One-stop shopping" doesn't leave much room, or money, for anyone else. And as the smaller shops close, everything we were promised by Measure K proponents fades away. Consumer choice is gone as Big-Box is our only option for many goods. Convenience is gone as we can no longer walk or bike to Longs or Rite-Aid or ACE, now closed. Sales tax revenue and jobs are gone as the deceased shops produced more in sum than the Big-Box does. Worst of all, Davis' unique character, quality of life and small-town charm is gone, irretrievably.
Line 234:	Line 234:
- Target is supported by a great many Christians in the Davis area and I know first hand the generosity of Target stores to Christian and secular chairties and projects. You seem to imply that the governor's proposals are not Christian in which case I would like to explore those reasons on another forum. I do not believe that Target is a Christian issue other than the fact that many Christian students and families do support Target and as such I would like Measure K to pass. Also it should be noticed that the high ranking officials of LEAD and Student Focus are also for Target passing. --["SteveOstrowski"]	+ Target is supported by a great many Christians in the Davis area and I know first hand the generosity of Target stores to Christian and secular charities and projects. You seem to imply that the governor's proposals are not Christian in which case I would like to explore those reasons on another forum. I do not believe that Target is a Christian issue other than the fact that many Christian students and families do support Target and as such I would like Measure K to pass. Also it should be noticed that the high ranking officials of LEAD and Student Focus are also for Target passing. --["SteveOstrowski"]

Target Debate

StephenHudson — 2006-10-26 08:41:10

right to build argument

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 119:	Line 119:
	+ + ==Right to Build== + Why should the citizens be allowed to decide whether or not a Target is built? Is it really our place to tell Target that they cannot build their complex of stores? I agree that we should not support a target, and boycotts would be something I would take part in and even help organize, but I do not think that it is our place to tell them whether or not they can build a building. I think that the proposition shouldn't have been put on the ballot; the citizens should not make zoning decisions, that's what we elect city officials to do. ["StephenHudson"]

Target Debate

EnirytManaen — 2006-10-22 15:56:56

Added comment

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 234:	Line 234:
	+ + I returned home one day from a friend's house to find a "Yes on K" sign on my lawn, which was put up without my permission. I live on Anderson and I've been told that my lawn is a great advertising space. I just think it is really classy to put a sign on someone's private property without their permission. --["EnirytManaen"]

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-10-16 15:01:55

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 231:	Line 231:
	+ Target is supported by a great many Christians in the Davis area and I know first hand the generosity of Target stores to Christian and secular chairties and projects. You seem to imply that the governor's proposals are not Christian in which case I would like to explore those reasons on another forum. I do not believe that Target is a Christian issue other than the fact that many Christian students and families do support Target and as such I would like Measure K to pass. Also it should be noticed that the high ranking officials of LEAD and Student Focus are also for Target passing. --["SteveOstrowski"] +

Target Debate

DebWestergaard — 2006-10-16 13:35:35

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 229:	Line 229:
- ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: ----- - You don't get "selected" by LEED. It's a certification level. There are 4 levels of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) that exist and Target is offering to build the lowest and minimum level (Certified). If UC Merced can build an entire campus of "Silver" level LEED, then a multimillion dollar corporation can definitely afford to build the highest level as well. I see you're a Christian Democratic Party Speaker and it's truly ironic that you support Target. Since 2004, Target has given $100,000 to Citizens to Save California, which worked to qualify the governor's initiatives for the special election ballot, and $210,000 to the governor's California Recovery Team, which supports Schwarzenegger's political aims. Target also spent $250,000 to back a referendum that erased a law that would have required many California businesses to provide health care for their workers, and $100,000 to the California Business Properties Association, another of Schwarzenegger's backers. ["http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/23/BAGDKEBPA71.DTL"] BTW, that's Greenpeace not Sierra Club that wants human construction halted ;-) Just as a friendly note, please check into all the facts not just convenient ones before posting about this very important proposal. -DebWestergaard - ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----	+ You don't get "selected" by LEED. It's a certification level. There are 4 levels of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) that exist and Target is offering to build the lowest and minimum level (Certified). If UC Merced can build an entire campus of "Silver" level LEED, then a multimillion dollar corporation can definitely afford to build the highest level as well. I see you're a Christian Democratic Party Speaker and it's truly ironic that you support Target. Since 2004, Target has given $100,000 to Citizens to Save California, which worked to qualify the governor's initiatives for the special election ballot, and $210,000 to the governor's California Recovery Team, which supports Schwarzenegger's political aims. Target also spent $250,000 to back a referendum that erased a law that would have required many California businesses to provide health care for their workers, and $100,000 to the California Business Properties Association, another of Schwarzenegger's backers. [http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/23/BAGDKEBPA71.DTL] BTW, that's Greenpeace not Sierra Club that wants human construction halted ;-) Just as a friendly note, please check into all the facts not just convenient ones before posting about this very important proposal. -DebWestergaard
Line 234:	Line 232:
- ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----

Target Debate

DebWestergaard — 2006-10-16 13:34:01

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 229:	Line 229:
- You don't get "selected" by LEED. It's a certification level. There are 4 levels of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) that exist and Target is offering to build the lowest and minimum level (Certified). If a UC Merced can build an entire campus of "Silver" level LEED, then a multimillion dollar corporation can definitely afford to build the highest level as well. BTW, that's Greenpeace not Sierra Club that wants human construction halted ;-) Just as a friendly note, please check into all the facts not just convenient ones before posting about this proposal. -DebWestergaard	+ ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: ----- + You don't get "selected" by LEED. It's a certification level. There are 4 levels of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) that exist and Target is offering to build the lowest and minimum level (Certified). If UC Merced can build an entire campus of "Silver" level LEED, then a multimillion dollar corporation can definitely afford to build the highest level as well. I see you're a Christian Democratic Party Speaker and it's truly ironic that you support Target. Since 2004, Target has given $100,000 to Citizens to Save California, which worked to qualify the governor's initiatives for the special election ballot, and $210,000 to the governor's California Recovery Team, which supports Schwarzenegger's political aims. Target also spent $250,000 to back a referendum that erased a law that would have required many California businesses to provide health care for their workers, and $100,000 to the California Business Properties Association, another of Schwarzenegger's backers. ["http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/23/BAGDKEBPA71.DTL"] BTW, that's Greenpeace not Sierra Club that wants human construction halted ;-) Just as a friendly note, please check into all the facts not just convenient ones before posting about this very important proposal. -DebWestergaard + ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----
Line 232:	Line 234:
	+ ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----

Target Debate

AlphaDog — 2006-10-16 13:26:52

re sierra club

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 230:	Line 230:
	+ + A bit off "target" here [snicker], but I'd like to qualify the Sierra Club comments; the group was pretty vehemently opposed to just about every proposed dog park site including one pre-approved by the City five years earlier. While I can't say that they want "all human construction halted," this is one former environmentalist who has found Sierra Club to be a bit over-zealous in protecting land from virtually all uses aside from birding. --["AlphaDog"]

Target Debate

DebWestergaard — 2006-10-16 13:21:50

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 228:	Line 228:
	+ + You don't get "selected" by LEED. It's a certification level. There are 4 levels of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) that exist and Target is offering to build the lowest and minimum level (Certified). If a UC Merced can build an entire campus of "Silver" level LEED, then a multimillion dollar corporation can definitely afford to build the highest level as well. BTW, that's Greenpeace not Sierra Club that wants human construction halted ;-) Just as a friendly note, please check into all the facts not just convenient ones before posting about this proposal. -DebWestergaard

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-10-15 22:12:24

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 226:	Line 226:
	+ + I know first hand that Yes on Measure K people will send voice mails that may sound like a computer because on occasion I sound like a computer or automatic message. Also I would like to point out that the Sierra Club will never be satisfied until all human construction is at a halt. This Target store is only one of a very few selected by LEED and if this building is environmentally unsound then all are. --["SteveOstrowski"]

Target Debate

DebWestergaard — 2006-10-15 20:00:17

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 225:	Line 225:
- No on K has never done a phone poll. I can guarantee you of this because I'm the treasurer of the campaign and we don't have that kind of money. Ye$ on K are the only people doing polling right now for this measure. There are two donors to the Ye$ on K campaign (I'm sure you can guess the first one) Target and Ziegler Associates for a total of $30,100. As of 9/30/2006, Ye$ on K has racked up $120,000 in unpaid bills (see dontbigboxdavis.org for reports). No on K has over 250 donors and $18,000 in total donations all from community members and The Sierra Club. In addition, if Ye$ on K is so "Green" why is The Sierra Club endorsing NO on K?! Also if they are so "Go Green!" why are they waisting fossil fuels by driving trucks around with billboards. The only "Green" I see here is the money that Target will be making and sending to Minneapolis.	+ No on K has never done a phone poll. I can guarantee you of this because I'm the treasurer of the campaign and we don't have that kind of money. Ye$ on K are the only people doing polling right now for this measure. There are two donors to the Ye$ on K campaign (I'm sure you can guess the first one) Target and Ziegler Associates for a total of $30,100. As of 9/30/2006, Ye$ on K has racked up $120,000 in unpaid bills (see dontbigboxdavis.org for reports). No on K has over 250 donors and $18,000 in total donations all from community members and The Sierra Club. In addition, if Ye$ on K is so "Green" why is The Sierra Club endorsing NO on K?! Also if they are so "Go Green!" why are they waisting fossil fuels by driving trucks around with billboards. The only "Green" I see here is the money that Target will be making and sending to Minneapolis. -DebWestergaard

Target Debate

DebWestergaard — 2006-10-15 19:58:49

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 224:	Line 224:
	+ + No on K has never done a phone poll. I can guarantee you of this because I'm the treasurer of the campaign and we don't have that kind of money. Ye$ on K are the only people doing polling right now for this measure. There are two donors to the Ye$ on K campaign (I'm sure you can guess the first one) Target and Ziegler Associates for a total of $30,100. As of 9/30/2006, Ye$ on K has racked up $120,000 in unpaid bills (see dontbigboxdavis.org for reports). No on K has over 250 donors and $18,000 in total donations all from community members and The Sierra Club. In addition, if Ye$ on K is so "Green" why is The Sierra Club endorsing NO on K?! Also if they are so "Go Green!" why are they waisting fossil fuels by driving trucks around with billboards. The only "Green" I see here is the money that Target will be making and sending to Minneapolis.

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-10-14 13:52:02

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 160:	Line 160:
	+ [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJZHSfzDOg Gotcha!] +

Target Debate

HeatherWitt — 2006-10-12 16:27:15

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 107:	Line 107:
	+ I initially started to read this page as a Yes on K voter and after reading the "Considerations" section further down, I have changed my mind. I have a suggestion for those that feel greatly affected by the transporation issue. Maybe a solution would be to create a ride-share program if unable to find a friend to car pool with (maybe even on wiki) for those that have the occasional desire to shop at Target since the route to the new Target though city streets would probably burn almost the same amount of gas as going to Woodland on hte highway (and the slight difference would be negligble if people car pooled anyway). I have to say that I have and probably will engage in Target shopping elsewhere and in the past I was able to share rides with friends since I didn't own a car. The idea of a store that is as large as two football fields is scary to me. I come from San Jose which is a prime example of poor city planning with huge chains and franchises wiping out any character or creativity. I originally was under the impression it was going to be a regular store and NOT an "Oh my god! I'm a huge consumering American" store. Foolish me. Heather Witt

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-10-12 11:15:10

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 219:	Line 219:
	+ + It might have sounded automatic because of the tone of the voice of the speaker. After calling a few hundred people the activist will start to speak more automatically in the phone. I can tell you that the Yes on Measure K do not do automatic calls and I think it is against the law in certain circumstances. --["SteveOstrowski"]

Target Debate

MichaelGiardina — 2006-10-12 10:53:13

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 215:	Line 215:
	+ + ----- + + One of these Meassure K activists (pro? con? I don't care) sent an automatic-dialer poll to my cell phone. Isn't that against some law of some sort? -- ["MichaelGiardina"]

Target Debate

JasonAller — 2006-10-11 22:02:04

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 163:	Line 163:
	+ [[Image(Dont_Big_Box_Davis_Sign.JPG, right, thumbnail, 300, "Sign in the window of a business ["downtown"]")]] +

Target Debate

JasonAller — 2006-10-11 22:00:58

Upload of image Dont_Big_Box_Davis_Sign.JPG.

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-10-11 08:11:00

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 204:	Line 204:
	+ + + The proposed target store is 137,000 sq ft, larger than Wal-Mart in Woodland and the size of 2.4 football fields. The entire project covers 19 acres and includes 46,000 sq ft of other undisclosed retail, but the Target is the heart of the matter. If K passes, this giant Target will be Davis' first Big-Box store. Big-Box means one-stop shopping for low priced, low quality goods; it is always auto-dependent with massive parking lots and freeway access; it provides low wage jobs and promotes sweatshop labor overseas; it is predatory and drives smaller shops out of business; it is the exemplar of rampant sprawl, consumerism and cultural homogenization. Some people are OK with all this as long as Big-Box delivers convenience and price, but a growing number of Davisites find what we are being asked to give up too high a price for cheap socks. + + As mentioned, the Target store alone is 137,000 sq ft; the current limit on retail in Davis is 30,000 sq ft. Making such a huge leap in retail scale disregards our city's General Plan process and endangers current and future retail stores that were designed within the city's standards. With it's tremendous unfair size advantage the Big-Box will cause store closings downtown and in neighborhood centers. Any new retail in Davis will have to meet the new scale, for only Big-Box can compete with Big-Box. With Measure K as precedent, the 52 acres along 2nd street adjacent to this project will be developed without public vote and filled with Lowes, Home Depot, Costco or what have you—who else is going to build next to a Super-Target? At this point, downtown and the small malls will be afflicted with store closings and permanent vacancies. Instead of the consumer "choice" and "convenience" promised we will all have to drive to the freeway for goods we used to get at our neighborhood centers. + Even if there is "only" the one Big-Box, as the Yes on K folks falsely promise ( ask yourself, have you ever seen a Target store surrounded by quiet fields and idyllic grasslands?), that alone will cause massive store closings. Target's own projections for a Davis store's earnings are $60 Million EVERY YEAR. That money has to come from somewhere, namely from established local businesses. With every adjoining community already having Big-Box stores, a Davis Target will not draw regional sales—excepting a few freeway travelers it's sales must come entirely from Davisites. Target is touting the number of credit card sales Davis residents make at outlying Targets as justification of their placement here, but anyone can tell you that Target Corp is not locating in Davis to get sales they already have in Woodland—they have to divert sales from established local business to survive and profit. But how much will be diverted? The National Trust for Historic preservation says that a Big-Box store diverts 80% of its sales from existing local business. Target hired their own firm, CBRichard Ellis to do an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) during the proposal process; CBRE based all their calculations (including the unbelievable and inaccurate sales tax projections) on a 2% diversion rate. So Target is going to come and pluck 98% of $60 Million from thin air every year....besides doing EIRs, CBRE is, uncoincidentally, a major real estate broker for Target Corp. I'm inclined to believe the Historic Preservation folks, but even if a very conservative 50% of targets earnings are diverted, that is still $30 Million every year! Our malls, downtown shops, groceries and pharmacies cannot take that kind of loss. + As Target sells virtually everything including groceries, pharmacy, general merchandise and garden items, many stores will be directly affected. But the draw of customer traffic will threaten even non-competetive, non-retail businesses. Restaurants will struggle as adjacent shops close; malls will lose their anchors and the small shops will follow; every shopping area will suffer as customer traffic is diverted to the freeway. "One-stop shopping" doesn't leave much room, or money, for anyone else. And as the smaller shops close, everything we were promised by Measure K proponents fades away. Consumer choice is gone as Big-Box is our only option for many goods. Convenience is gone as we can no longer walk or bike to Longs or Rite-Aid or ACE, now closed. Sales tax revenue and jobs are gone as the deceased shops produced more in sum than the Big-Box does. Worst of all, Davis' unique character, quality of life and small-town charm is gone, irretrivably. + Proponents of K are dismissing such predictions as dire and unrealistic, yet this is exactly what has happened in every small town across the country that has allowed Big-Box on its periphery. Visit downtown Woodland, Vacaville or Fairfield if you want to see Big-Box blight in evidence. That Big-Box diverts sales and closes small businesses is such an accepted fact within our culture that The Simpsons and Family Guy make fun of it; does Target really think they can spend enough money to refute common knowledge? Apparently so, as Pro-Kers also like to claim that their Big-Box mall with its 19 acres of pavement and 10.000 additional car trips A DAY to sell landfill-clogging disposable goods produced without environmental restrictions half a world away and transported here by the cheapest, most polluting methods is somehow "Green". Please. An environmentally sound Big-Box mall is like a healthy meal at McDonalds. Like Target, PG&E is now posing as "Green" to influence the H&I vote. How gullible do they think we are? + The Yes on K campaign's signs say "I LOVE Target". Well, I don't hate or love Target and I know that Target Corporation doesn't love me. Like any corporation, they exist only for the bottom line of profit and see us as potential dollars, nothing more. I do however, Love Davis. I grew up here, went to school here, graduated UCD, started my own small business downtown, bought a home on Pole Line Rd and I am raising my son here. I Love Davis for it's small town feel, our sense of community, it's environmentalism and bike-friendliness, the sense of security and Davis' unique character. A massive Big-Box freeway mall is entirely inconsistent with this and puts it all at risk. MEASURE K will change the face of Davis, universally for the worse. Preserve our community. Vote NO on K.

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-08-22 07:18:08

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 117:	Line 117:
	+ *Well, the planning commission met, and I have to say, John Dewes, screw you. It was the standard corporate response, ass-covering, denying, shifting the blame, questioning of sources because they document events that happened two or three years ago. Screw you. You care more about profit than people. We will fight you all the way, you sweatshop owning exploiters. ["TobinJones"]
Line 170:	Line 171:
- ==Other Arguments== - - Well, the planning commission met, and I have to say, John Dewes, screw you. It was the standard corporate response, ass-covering, denying, shifting the blame, questioning of sources because they document events that happened two or three years ago. Screw you. You care more about profit than people. We will fight you all the way, you sweatshop owning exploiters. ["TobinJones"] - * Try asking him about the lowest income wages again. :) I mean, um, there were more Dewes hyjinks tonight. --["JosephBleckman"] - Oh, do tell. --["TobinJones"] - One of the Councilmen kept asking Dewes what the lowest income wage set could be. Tellingly Dewes answered at first by talking about their benefit package. When asked again he kept glancing back at his boss/comerades while saying that he couldn't answer due to the many different starting types. As he was continued to be grilled into answering the question that was the answer he gave over and over and over again. The man looked enermously flustered. Unfortunately the Councilman running that inqusition gave up rather than forcing him to give a non-B.S. answer. --["JosephBleckman"]	+ ==Jobs== + + Try asking him about the lowest income wages again. :) I mean, um, there were more Dewes hyjinks tonight. --["JosephBleckman"] + Oh, do tell. --["TobinJones"] + One of the Councilmen kept asking Dewes what the lowest income wage set could be. Tellingly Dewes answered at first by talking about their benefit package. When asked again he kept glancing back at his boss/comerades while saying that he couldn't answer due to the many different starting types. As he was continued to be grilled into answering the question that was the answer he gave over and over and over again. The man looked enermously flustered. Unfortunately the Councilman running that inqusition gave up rather than forcing him to give a non-B.S. answer. --["JosephBleckman"]
Line 177:	Line 177:
- My concern isn't about the Davis laborers. It's about the workers in Saipan who have been coerced and threatened into working in factories for Target. I don't know that much about Target's first-world practices, but their third world ones are abominable. - It's not a Davis downtown labor issue, but probably for different reasons than you think. If the Target is built, I wager that 80% of the labor force will be minorities from Dixon and Woodland. Why? Because they have a better work ethic and more flexible hours than most students. After all, how many UCD students are willing to put on the Target apron and push carts across the parking lot? How many UCD students will be able to schedule classes so that they can get out to the other side of town to put in 4 hours then come back across town? As to working conditions, I am sure that Target will not treat their employees as well as downtown merchants. I challenge you to go into Ace Hardware or Dibbert Lumber and ask the help if they are going to consider changing jobs to Target. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] - So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["BY"] - I said it wasn't a downtown Davis Labor issue and I didn't say I had a problem with 80% of the workers coming from Dixon and Woodland. Personally, I'd prefer an employer that paid good wages and benefits, but OTOH, if we run all the busnesses out of town that pay minimum wage, there wouldn't be a lot of restaurants, hotels and movie theaters left.	+ My concern isn't about the Davis laborers. It's about the workers in Saipan who have been coerced and threatened into working in factories for Target. I don't know that much about Target's first-world practices, but their third world ones are abominable. + It's not a Davis downtown labor issue, but probably for different reasons than you think. If the Target is built, I wager that 80% of the labor force will be minorities from Dixon and Woodland. Why? Because they have a better work ethic and more flexible hours than most students. After all, how many UCD students are willing to put on the Target apron and push carts across the parking lot? How many UCD students will be able to schedule classes so that they can get out to the other side of town to put in 4 hours then come back across town? As to working conditions, I am sure that Target will not treat their employees as well as downtown merchants. I challenge you to go into Ace Hardware or Dibbert Lumber and ask the help if they are going to consider changing jobs to Target. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] + So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["BY"] + I said it wasn't a downtown Davis Labor issue and I didn't say I had a problem with 80% of the workers coming from Dixon and Woodland. Personally, I'd prefer an employer that paid good wages and benefits, but OTOH, if we run all the busnesses out of town that pay minimum wage, there wouldn't be a lot of restaurants, hotels and movie theaters left.

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-08-22 05:25:29

Still a mess

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 75:	Line 75:
	+ + I would be completely against a target, if it didn't have a niche in this market. Some things don't need to be high quality, they can just be cheap. Unfortunately there's nowhere in davis that gets nowhere near this kind of goods. Ace gets close, and the products are high quality, but generally a good deal more expensive. My concerns about these buisnesses are less their global effect, eventually their business practices will turn around and bite them in the ass as places unionize, but more the damage they do to american communities. 10 years ago, a target would have been awful in davis, and would have retarded severly the growth of downtown. Today though, Dowtown is a different place, and can stand independant of the cheap wares of target. I would rather shop at a local business, but unless one can fill the niche that target is filling, I don't see why capitilism can't just take it's course here. Char George + + I am still undecided about whether or not I would want a Target in Davis. I think that it would dramatically change the town, and may create a "broken window" effect that would make it easier for other big box stores to come to town. I really don't want this to happen. On the other hand, I think that Davis is losing a lot of tax revenue from people who go to stores like Target in other towns. My biggest gripe is the cost of clothing currently available in Davis. Last night I was walking around places downtown and it almost put me over the edge. All the clothing stores in town other than Gottschalks are "Boutiques" that sell only $90 tank tops and $300 jeans. I understand that the Naked Thread is all organic or sustainable, therefore worth their price, but at most of these places, the only reason behind the price is the brand. It's rediculous. Also, most stores in Davis don't sell my size (XL-XXL). Whether it's at Target or not, I'd love to be able to shop for clothes in Davis and find something in my size that I can actually afford. -Janelle + + One thing people need to realize is that there currently is a limit to how large a retailer can have their store in Davis. I believe it is somewhere around 30,000 square feet. To make it worth their while, Target would require approximately 100,000 square feet. If Target does get built, laws that had prevented previous big box outlets from coming in will essentially be null. Regardless whether you are in favor of Target being built, I'm sure that we can agree that we don't need a Wal-Mart, K-mart, and Kohls. Repealing the law will make it infinitely more difficult to do so. + + Allowing Target to be built will prove problematic. What if they were to rework their store somewhere along the lines of what Ace has done?-JustinLanska
Line 134:	Line 142:
- I would be completely against a target, if it didn't have a niche in this market. Some things don't need to be high quality, they can just be cheap. Unfortunately there's nowhere in davis that gets nowhere near this kind of goods. Ace gets close, and the products are high quality, but generally a good deal more expensive. My concerns about these buisnesses are less their global effect, eventually their business practices will turn around and bite them in the ass as places unionize, but more the damage they do to american communities. 10 years ago, a target would have been awful in davis, and would have retarded severly the growth of downtown. Today though, Dowtown is a different place, and can stand independant of the cheap wares of target. I would rather shop at a local business, but unless one can fill the niche that target is filling, I don't see why capitilism can't just take it's course here. ["CharlesGeorge" Char George] - - * I am still undecided about whether or not I would want a Target in Davis. I think that it would dramatically change the town, and may create a "broken window" effect that would make it easier for other big box stores to come to town. I really don't want this to happen. On the other hand, I think that Davis is losing a lot of tax revenue from people who go to stores like Target in other towns. My biggest gripe is the cost of clothing currently available in Davis. Last night I was walking around places downtown and it almost put me over the edge. All the clothing stores in town other than ["Gottschalks"] are "["Clothing Stores" Boutiques]" that sell only $90 tank tops and $300 jeans. I understand that the ["Naked Thread"] is all organic or sustainable, therefore worth their price, but at most of these places, the only reason behind the price is the brand. It's rediculous. Also, most stores in Davis don't sell my size (XL-XXL). Whether it's at Target or not, I'd love to be able to shop for clothes in Davis and find something in my size that I can actually afford. -["JanelleAlvstadMattson" Janelle] - - One thing people need to realize is that there currently is a limit to how large a retailer can have their store in Davis. I believe it is somewhere around 30,000 square feet. To make it worth their while, Target would require approximately 100,000 square feet. If Target does get built, laws that had prevented previous big box outlets from coming in will essentially be null. Regardless whether you are in favor of Target being built, I'm sure that we can agree that we don't need a Wal-Mart, K-mart, and Kohls. Repealing the law will make it infinitely more difficult to do so. - - Allowing Target to be built will prove problematic. What if they were to rework their store somewhere along the lines of what Ace has done?-["JustinLanska"]	+ ==Yes on Target== + + The opportunity is here, and may get shut down if more people don’t speak up to say '''“YES! I want a Target in my town.”''' Don’t leave the decisions up to the nay-sayers… +
Line 143:	Line 148:
- - - ==Yes on Target== - - The opportunity is here, and may get shut down if more people don’t speak up to say '''“YES! I want a Target in my town.”''' Don’t leave the decisions up to the nay-sayers… -
Line 171:	Line 170:
- -----	+ ==Other Arguments==

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-08-22 05:18:34

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 86:	Line 86:
	+ + I will admit to being underslept (my bed deflated last night), but I will share an anecdote about going to Target by Yolobus. I don't have a car, and I needed to buy an air mattress today (and didn't want to pay what my other chainstore option Big 5 would charge, which was $20 more). And going to Target by Yolobus turns a minor errand into a 2-hour errand, since the schedule is such that you're going to be in Woodland for about 70 minutes, whether or not you want to. This wasn't much fun. I'm sure it's very easy for folks with cars to take them to Woodland, and my errand would have been about 40 minutes (drive, buy single item, leave). But 2 hours is a bit much. -dan brown + + Dan, an air mattress is a perfect example of disposable, wasteful consumerism. I've been there, and I know it is cheaper than buying a real mattress, but they don't last! Buy a real mattress, or a futon! + + Well if you bothered to read his page (or even bothered to consider that other people might be in a different living situation than you) you'd know that Dan is only going to be in Davis until next month. With that in mind, I don't find it wasteful at all that he's buying an air mattress instead of an expensive conventional mattress that he wouldnt be able to bring with him anyways. Please try to consider that other people may have different needs than your own before accusing them of "wasteful consumerism." - EyadDarras + + + Indeed, my understanding is that it would be illegal in California for me to sell a mattress at the end of next month to another person without first "fumigating" it. Further, I can't sleep on futon (I broke my back six years ago), and it turns out that a good $50 air mattress is good for about 150 nights of reasonably good sleep before it goes tilt (I patched it about 2 months ago with great success, but apparently two leaks is one too many). My real mattress, back home, cost a good 10-20 times as much, and will probably be used for about 20 times as long, but is going to be much more trouble to dispose of. I'm not thrilled about putting 10 pounds of plastic into my trash this weekend, but in the grand scheme of things, I don't feel especially guilty about it. I haven't been in a private car in two weeks; how long has it been for you? -dan brown + + I think an hour each way is pretty normal for intercity bus trips. Furthermore, longer trip time and misalignment with a personal schedule is an inherent disadvantage to taking public transportation. At the same time, it is an advantage because it provides the opportunity to better understand the geography and society of the area. There are tradeoffs between all choices in any situation and if they are better understood, the most appropriate choice for a particular situation can be more easily made. -NickSchmalenberger + *You're right, of course, that this is probably reasonable for an inter-city trip. I'm just grumpy that I needed an inter-city trip to replace my stupid air mattress. If there were a Target in Davis, I would have walked there, and taken the bus home. [I am, however, much better slept today than I was yesterday, and consequently less grumpy.] -dan brown +
Line 121:	Line 134:
- I will admit to being underslept (my bed deflated last night), but I will share an anecdote about going to Target by Yolobus. I don't have a car, and I needed to buy an air mattress today (and didn't want to pay what my other chainstore option ["Big 5"] would charge, which was $20 more). And going to Target by Yolobus turns a minor errand into a 2-hour errand, since the schedule is such that you're going to be in Woodland for about 70 minutes, whether or not you want to. This wasn't much fun. I'm sure it's very easy for folks with cars to take them to Woodland, and my errand would have been about 40 minutes (drive, buy single item, leave). But 2 hours is a bit much. -["DanielBrown" dan brown] - Dan, an air mattress is a perfect example of disposable, wasteful consumerism. I've been there, and I know it is cheaper than buying a real mattress, but they don't last! Buy a real mattress, or a futon! - -Well if you bothered to read his page (or even bothered to consider that other people might be in a different living situation than you) you'd know that Dan is only going to be in Davis until next month. With that in mind, I don't find it wasteful at all that he's buying an air mattress instead of an expensive conventional mattress that he wouldnt be able to bring with him anyways. Please try to consider that other people may have different needs than your own before accusing them of "wasteful consumerism." - ["EyadDarras"] - * Indeed, my understanding is that it would be illegal in California for me to sell a mattress at the end of next month to another person without first "fumigating" it. Further, I can't sleep on futon (I broke my back six years ago), and it turns out that a good $50 air mattress is good for about 150 nights of reasonably good sleep before it goes tilt (I patched it about 2 months ago with great success, but apparently two leaks is one too many). My real mattress, back home, cost a good 10-20 times as much, and will probably be used for about 20 times as long, but is going to be much more trouble to dispose of. I'm not thrilled about putting 10 pounds of plastic into my trash this weekend, but in the grand scheme of things, I don't feel especially guilty about it. I haven't been in a private car in two weeks; how long has it been for you? -["DanielBrown" dan brown] - I think an hour each way is pretty normal for intercity bus trips. Furthermore, longer trip time and misalignment with a personal schedule is an inherent disadvantage to taking public transportation. At the same time, it is an advantage because it provides the opportunity to better understand the geography and society of the area. There are tradeoffs between all choices in any situation and if they are better understood, the most appropriate choice for a particular situation can be more easily made. -["NickSchmalenberger"] - You're right, of course, that this is probably reasonable for an inter-city trip. I'm just grumpy that I needed an inter-city trip to replace my stupid air mattress. If there were a Target in Davis, I would have walked there, and taken the bus home. [I am, however, much better slept today than I was yesterday, and consequently less grumpy.] -["DanielBrown" dan brown] - -

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-08-20 00:17:46

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 68:	Line 68:
- * rediculous. i dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at rediculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they wernt planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["MattHh"] -	+ * Rediculous. I dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at rediculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they wernt planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["MattHh"]
Line 92:	Line 91:
- * Sure: [http://www.knowmore.org/index.php/Target_Corporation] - * You're right; a few of those charges do sound troubling. The problem is that the term "sweatshop" is often used for both voluntary and involuntary conditions. But a couple of those cases do sound like actual coercion was involved. The site you link is hardly without biases, but it sounds like something worth looking into. I rarely set foot in Target anyway, much preferring Wal-Mart. --["RoyWright"]	+ * Sure: [http://www.knowmore.org/index.php/Target_Corporation] + * You're right; a few of those charges do sound troubling. The problem is that the term "sweatshop" is often used for both voluntary and involuntary conditions. But a couple of those cases do sound like actual coercion was involved. The site you link is hardly without biases, but it sounds like something worth looking into. I rarely set foot in Target anyway, much preferring Wal-Mart. --["RoyWright"]
Line 95:	Line 94:
- * By "voluntary," I mean the workers aren't held at their jobs against their will. If you truly believe that you, from the luxury of Davis, know better than the workers in question whether they should accept a job, then I can only sincerely hope for their sakes that you never gain that kind of power over them. Now, as I said, it seems there may be some genuinely ''in''voluntary labor going on, and if that's the case, it truly is criminal and should be punished. --["RoyWright"]	+ * By "voluntary," I mean the workers aren't held at their jobs against their will. If you truly believe that you, from the luxury of Davis, know better than the workers in question whether they should accept a job, then I can only sincerely hope for their sakes that you never gain that kind of power over them. Now, as I said, it seems there may be some genuinely ''in''voluntary labor going on, and if that's the case, it truly is criminal and should be punished. --["RoyWright"]
Line 97:	Line 96:
	+ + ==Other Arguments==

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-08-20 00:13:47

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 77:	Line 77:
- ==Other Arguments==	+ ==Travel and Distance==
Line 79:	Line 79:
- you know all i got to say is that the Target Corp moving to davis is a horrible idea. there are 3 Targets within 18 miles of downotown Davis. They are probably going to close the Woodland one soon (Woodland Democract said that)... Have you thought about what that is going ot do to the people who depend on those jobs... are you now going to be happy cause you can buy your crappy free trade imported crap and cheap proces so someone making not even a living wage can drive form woodland, davis, west sac, dixon or somehwere else and seel it to you. their labor practices are horrible. they are building it next to a god damn EPA Superfund site. that's right, we can now buy some crappy crap right next to one of the most toxic clean up sites for a hundred mile radius. Big box stores suck, and if you went to the city coucli meetings, you woudl know that the tax revenue that we woudl get from the TArget does not add up becuase of increase in law inforcement, zoneing changes, etc... we would make between 40,-70,000 dollars as a city, which means nothing with the ammount of new traffic lights, cops, security, and cultural lameness that comes along with a Target. Poeple need jobs, but not ones that keep you down, selling crap, not having medical or dental (full time only and they limit the number of those), and NO living wage. Think about what you REALLY need, WHERE all the imported consumer crap (all that GMO and corporate food and plants too) comes from, and if this is comehting that will actually benefit us as a town or community in any way... by the way if you need a can opener, borrow a neighbors or go to ace, or use a knife. dont be lazy, be creative... - ["CompostNolan" blessings...] - * CompostNolan: Again, people need shampoo and tubesocks outside the 1000% markup. And I can understand that you're a big fan of people burning fuel to go to "close" places such as Woodland's "Mall" Target. There are very few employers in Davis who provide good benefits. However, there are very many stores who sell cheap crap at huge markups. At least Target's markups less ruthless. I know there are many people who think a Target would be a losing proposition in terms of resources for the city. That's why I think the Target would do better out by Mace and Chiles rather than the proposed site. However, I also think the Proposed site would not cause a horrible amount of infrastructural nightmares for Davis, because, essentially, nothing is on 2nd street except "Box stores" containing gyms and other random things. And frankly, I think it's a bit whimsical to think that Targets require increased police presence. There are shoplifters everywhere. Target isn't going to draw in out-of-Davisers, since the Vacaville, Sacramento, and Woodland locations are close enough for essentially all outlying areas. The goods that people in Davis deserve are a long commute away. What ''some'' people seem to fail to realize is that ''people already go to Target'', and that people have a constant need for things that are sold there, and that people are being ripped off in Davis. OR, we could try and buy tubesocks at Ace. Great idea.	+ You know all i got to say is that the Target Corp moving to davis is a horrible idea. there are 3 Targets within 18 miles of downotown Davis. They are probably going to close the Woodland one soon (Woodland Democract said that)... Have you thought about what that is going ot do to the people who depend on those jobs... are you now going to be happy cause you can buy your crappy free trade imported crap and cheap proces so someone making not even a living wage can drive form woodland, davis, west sac, dixon or somehwere else and seel it to you. their labor practices are horrible. they are building it next to a god damn EPA Superfund site. that's right, we can now buy some crappy crap right next to one of the most toxic clean up sites for a hundred mile radius. Big box stores suck, and if you went to the city coucli meetings, you woudl know that the tax revenue that we woudl get from the TArget does not add up becuase of increase in law inforcement, zoneing changes, etc... we would make between 40,-70,000 dollars as a city, which means nothing with the ammount of new traffic lights, cops, security, and cultural lameness that comes along with a Target. Poeple need jobs, but not ones that keep you down, selling crap, not having medical or dental (full time only and they limit the number of those), and NO living wage. Think about what you REALLY need, WHERE all the imported consumer crap (all that GMO and corporate food and plants too) comes from, and if this is comehting that will actually benefit us as a town or community in any way... by the way if you need a can opener, borrow a neighbors or go to ace, or use a knife. dont be lazy, be creative... - ["CompostNolan" blessings...] + * CompostNolan: Again, people need shampoo and tubesocks outside the 1000% markup. And I can understand that you're a big fan of people burning fuel to go to "close" places such as Woodland's "Mall" Target. There are very few employers in Davis who provide good benefits. However, there are very many stores who sell cheap crap at huge markups. At least Target's markups less ruthless. I know there are many people who think a Target would be a losing proposition in terms of resources for the city. That's why I think the Target would do better out by Mace and Chiles rather than the proposed site. However, I also think the Proposed site would not cause a horrible amount of infrastructural nightmares for Davis, because, essentially, nothing is on 2nd street except "Box stores" containing gyms and other random things. And frankly, I think it's a bit whimsical to think that Targets require increased police presence. There are shoplifters everywhere. Target isn't going to draw in out-of-Davisers, since the Vacaville, Sacramento, and Woodland locations are close enough for essentially all outlying areas. The goods that people in Davis deserve are a long commute away. What ''some'' people seem to fail to realize is that ''people already go to Target'', and that people have a constant need for things that are sold there, and that people are being ripped off in Davis. OR, we could try and buy tubesocks at Ace. Great idea.
Line 82:	Line 82:
- *(your story makes me cry) ["DudeNude"]	+ *(your story makes me cry) ["DudeNude"]
Line 86:	Line 86:
- * Aren't they closing that Target and mall down? I'm pretty sure I heard its going to become a walmart superstore. And it can be hard depending how much you plan to buy, or even if its not much, how hard it is to move it. (ex: 24 or 48 packs of toilet paper are a hassle when your hands are full). -["EdwinSaada" ES]	+ * Aren't they closing that Target and mall down? I'm pretty sure I heard its going to become a walmart superstore. And it can be hard depending how much you plan to buy, or even if its not much, how hard it is to move it. (ex: 24 or 48 packs of toilet paper are a hassle when your hands are full). -["EdwinSaada" ES]
Line 88:	Line 88:
- - -	+ ==Target Sweatshops==
Line 182:	Line 180:
- Just a few considerations:	+ ==Considerations==
Line 201:	Line 199:
- [[Include(IntegrateComments)]] - \|\|<bgcolor='#FFFFAA'> Or maybe actually make a main article text in the first place.\|\| - - ^ LOL - that's the funniest Include I've seen in a while. Yes, I guess this DOES need quote integration. - ["MichaelGiardina"]

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-08-19 23:40:40

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 153:	Line 153:
	+ [http://www.targetindavis.com/target_news.wmv Target Debate] +

Target Debate

JabberWokky — 2006-08-08 17:02:27

emdash

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 24:	Line 24:
- Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.—["GrumpyoldGeek"] - - Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. —["GrumpyoldGeek"]	+ Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.--["GrumpyoldGeek"] + + Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["GrumpyoldGeek"]
Line 30:	Line 30:
- Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? —["GrumpyoldGeek"]	+ Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? --["GrumpyoldGeek"]
Line 57:	Line 57:
- Okay, this really needs to be on its own page by now. However, a few thoughts. I agree that people are consumeristic to disgusting proportions. But you can't BOTH say that "hey waste fuel and drive to woodland," but also don't build a target nearby because of how it causes 3rd world countries to underpay and otherwise exploit their employees. Pick one. The fact of the matter is that Davis is a town that sells a lot of trinkets ("gifts!"), food and little else... there's really no DIRECT competition with Target. Their buggest direct competition would be with big chains like Rite Aid and Longs (and Grocery stores to some extent)— didn't you notice? Davisites "import" just about everything. Target is a much better choice than Walmart beacuse they tend to care a bit more about impact upon 3rd world countries—as well as greater selectivity in choosing its merchandise. They're not perfect however. But I think Target would be a good fit for Davis. But it just needs to be put in the right spot. —JaimeRaba	+ Okay, this really needs to be on its own page by now. However, a few thoughts. I agree that people are consumeristic to disgusting proportions. But you can't BOTH say that "hey waste fuel and drive to woodland," but also don't build a target nearby because of how it causes 3rd world countries to underpay and otherwise exploit their employees. Pick one. The fact of the matter is that Davis is a town that sells a lot of trinkets ("gifts!"), food and little else... there's really no DIRECT competition with Target. Their buggest direct competition would be with big chains like Rite Aid and Longs (and Grocery stores to some extent)-- didn't you notice? Davisites "import" just about everything. Target is a much better choice than Walmart beacuse they tend to care a bit more about impact upon 3rd world countries--as well as greater selectivity in choosing its merchandise. They're not perfect however. But I think Target would be a good fit for Davis. But it just needs to be put in the right spot. --JaimeRaba
Line 73:	Line 73:
- Um....maybe the people who work for the local businesses, the people who shop at the local businesses, and the people who OWN the local businesses? You try working for Target, I can tell you first hand that it wouldn't be nearly as nice as working for a small independent business. — BonnieStewart	+ Um....maybe the people who work for the local businesses, the people who shop at the local businesses, and the people who OWN the local businesses? You try working for Target, I can tell you first hand that it wouldn't be nearly as nice as working for a small independent business. -- BonnieStewart

Target Debate

MattHh — 2006-08-07 08:11:35

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 68:	Line 68:
	+ * rediculous. i dont think you understand what stores might go out of business. Target plans on having 10% of their ginormous floor plan used for groceries and 10% used for drugs. once longs, riteaid, walgreens, albertsons, and safeway go out of business in your area, you wont have the luxioury to acesss to 24 hour medicine. you wont be able to walk to your local grocery store, and you will have to go to the nugget to get high priced produce. so if your trully a poor college student you wont even get produce which has bad health effects for the davis population. If target was like the one in woodland i probably would not be so strongly against it, but the fact is that this one will be almost double the size with a lot more grocery and drug items. what they will do is sell their food items at rediculously marked down prices (actually their losing money on them) just to get you to do all your shopping there so they can have a monopoly on as large of the market as possible. Target actually intentionally plans to hurt other small businesses. in order for them to put a store here they must create hundreds of thousands more trips than the trips they will now lose to their woodland/dixon stores. these trips are obviously coming from not going to other stores, unless target thinks people are just going to spend more money. if they wernt planning on harming local businesses they would not move here because that means they would lose money. --["MattHh"] +

Target Debate

MattHh — 2006-08-07 07:54:03

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 81:	Line 81:
	+ * this is a poor argument. first of all most places in davis are several miles away from the davis proposed target location. if you live in north davis the davis location will actually be slower to get to than the woodland location (according to mapquest). first of all a lot of people working at target would take the bus from woodland (no added polution). also since the target is now in town, people will no longer do the occassional bulk buying trip (saving time and gas). now people will go to target every month or several times a month for that matter, actually this increases the polution because most of these people will be driving cars for 5 miles or so. how many people are going to seriously bike merchandise from target. i rairly see anyone doing that from a safeway thats only 1 mile or less away. +

Target Debate

RobWestergaard — 2006-08-06 20:46:58

Changed URL and text for site opposed to Target

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 153:	Line 153:
- Our city staff, previous councils and citizens have worked hard to make our city and especially our downtown special. Why is the Council super-majority now undoing that work by supporting a huge alternate shopping destination in Davis? We only have to look up Highway 113 for evidence of what happens to a downtown when big-box stores spring up on the perimeter of a city. This attempt to jam home such a major development is politics at its worst. Yes, please come to the City Council meeting on June 13, but don't wait until 8PM. Come at 6:30PM, when the meeting starts, so you can get a seat.	+ On November 7th, Davis residents will vote whether to allow a 137,000 square foot Big-Box (Target) store and four additional unnamed stores comprising 46,000 square feet onto Mace Blvd and 2nd Street, in Mace Ranch.
Line 155:	Line 155:
- Go to [http://www.NoTargetInDavis.org/] for more information. Keep our city special instead of supporting "me-too" retail sprawl.	+ This project flies in the face of Davis General Plan that limits retail to 30,000 square feet and specifically calls for neighborhood shopping outside of downtown, not regional. A store of this size will dominate retail and cause store closings downtown and in neighborhood centers. + + The zoning change required will break faith with the Mace Ranch neighborhood. The traffic, pollution and crime that the center will create will affect quality of life throughout Davis. Furthermore, hidden costs to support this development will offset the tax gains Target promised while wooing the City Council. + + Go to [http://www.DontBigBoxDavis.org/] for more information. Keep our city special instead of supporting "me-too" retail sprawl.

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-07-26 17:00:10

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 52:	Line 52:
	+ ==Local Business== + + that is all the workers in free trade zones who made this stuff so happy that we are buying and buying that cheer in the back ground, that’s the sound of Target shareholders jumping for joy while Mom and Pop shops close in Davis. Oh convenience that is just what we need that will make things so much easier for US!!! This community does not need this place their stuff is cheaper because it is easier for big box stores to flood markets, get goods cheaper, while ignoring the people who made them, other local businesses, and the community they ‘serve’. Have it your way + + we’ll stop by Starbucks to get some coffee and get McDonalds on the way home from Target k?? Your cheap sox are well worth all of the environmental degradation, cheap abused labor from all over SE Asia, Africa, and the Americas, and the sadness of decades old mom and pop shops closing in ever town in the US. How convenient! + Okay, this really needs to be on its own page by now. However, a few thoughts. I agree that people are consumeristic to disgusting proportions. But you can't BOTH say that "hey waste fuel and drive to woodland," but also don't build a target nearby because of how it causes 3rd world countries to underpay and otherwise exploit their employees. Pick one. The fact of the matter is that Davis is a town that sells a lot of trinkets ("gifts!"), food and little else... there's really no DIRECT competition with Target. Their buggest direct competition would be with big chains like Rite Aid and Longs (and Grocery stores to some extent)— didn't you notice? Davisites "import" just about everything. Target is a much better choice than Walmart beacuse they tend to care a bit more about impact upon 3rd world countries—as well as greater selectivity in choosing its merchandise. They're not perfect however. But I think Target would be a good fit for Davis. But it just needs to be put in the right spot. —JaimeRaba + + Hey.. Better Target then Walmart. Either way, I think we could use some large all-purpose store. I don't have a car; I'm not biking over to Woodland, Dixon, or Vacaville to buy clothing. The "Mom and Pop" stores simply don't provide men's clothing. Gap? You have to be kidding me. Think I'm going to pay a ridiculous price for a label? Personally, I root for a Costco; good employee benefits and good prices. + + What about using target.com for socks if you feel you must have cheap ones and not burning gas or forcing davis to have a big box? + If you buy it from target.com you have to sign up and give them personal information. Then you have to pay extra for shipping. And gas is still burned by someone. UPS is burning gas to deliver the socks to your house. Most importantly, neither Yolo County nor the City of Davis recive any tax revenue. When people travel to Woodland, their tax dollars go to the city of Woodland. When people travel to Dixon, their tax dollars go to Dixon and Solano County. - ArlenAbraham + Putting a Target in Davis would put a lot the local stores that supply similar goods out of business, namely mom and pops like Ace Hardware, Longs Drugs, The Gap and Office Max. LeightonHinkley + + My sarcasm detector just flew right off the scale on that one. At least, I hope its sarcasm. - AlexGarbutt + + Target rocks. Who gives a crap if local businesses go out of business. if they can't compete with a bulk goods store, then obviously they have nothing worthwhile to contribute to Davis except overpriced crap. Target donates money to local schools too. Think of the children. ["ApolloStumpy"] + + AS: (think of your children when they are working in a sweatshop owned by China jackass) DudeNude + + Um....maybe the people who work for the local businesses, the people who shop at the local businesses, and the people who OWN the local businesses? You try working for Target, I can tell you first hand that it wouldn't be nearly as nice as working for a small independent business. — BonnieStewart + + Well, if a target comes to town, then fine. Davis has been screaming about the potential death of downtown for years. Borders was going to do it, Cost Plus was going to do it, etc... It seems to be the rallying cry. "Save our downtown with its pricey boutique shops that students rarely visit." Then they wonder about sales tax leakage. Davis is no longer the small college town it once was. In other news, I saw a sign on Road 102 near Interstate 5 in Woodland stating that they would be opening a Costco and Target at that location. So the mall target will probably close down when that happens. -RogerClark +
Line 53:	Line 76:
-
Line 62:	Line 84:
- that is all the workers in free trade zones who made this stuff so happy that we are buying and buying - that cheer in the back ground, that’s the sound of Target shareholders jumping for joy while Mom and Pop shops close in Davis. Oh convenience that is just what we need that will make things so much easier for US!!! This community does not need this place their stuff is cheaper because it is easier for big box stores to flood markets, get goods cheaper, while ignoring the people who made them, other local businesses, and the community they ‘serve’. Have it your way - we’ll stop by Starbucks to get some coffee and get McDonalds on the way home from Target k?? Your cheap sox are well worth all of the environmental degradation, cheap abused labor from all over SE Asia, Africa, and the Americas, and the sadness of decades old mom and pop shops closing in ever town in the US. How convenient! - * Okay, this really needs to be on its own page by now. However, a few thoughts. I agree that people are consumeristic to disgusting proportions. But you can't BOTH say that "hey waste fuel and drive to woodland," but also don't build a target nearby because of how it causes 3rd world countries to underpay and otherwise exploit their employees. Pick one. The fact of the matter is that Davis is a town that sells a lot of trinkets ("gifts!"), food and little else... there's really no DIRECT competition with Target. Their buggest direct competition would be with big chains like Rite Aid and Longs (and Grocery stores to some extent)-- didn't you notice? Davisites "import" just about everything. Target is a much better choice than Walmart beacuse they tend to care a bit more about impact upon 3rd world countries--as well as greater selectivity in choosing its merchandise. They're not perfect however. But I think Target would be a good fit for Davis. But it just needs to be put in the right spot. --["JaimeRaba"] - * Hey.. Better Target then Walmart. Either way, I think we could use some large all-purpose store. I don't have a car; I'm not biking over to Woodland, Dixon, or Vacaville to buy clothing. The "Mom and Pop" stores simply don't provide men's clothing. Gap? You have to be kidding me. Think I'm going to pay a ridiculous price for a label? Personally, I root for a Costco; good employee benefits and good prices. - * What about using target.com for socks if you feel you must have cheap ones and not burning gas or forcing davis to have a big box? - * If you buy it from target.com you have to sign up and give them personal information. Then you have to pay extra for shipping. And gas is still burned by someone. UPS is burning gas to deliver the socks to your house. Most importantly, neither ["Yolo County"] nor the ["City of Davis"] recive any tax revenue. When people travel to Woodland, their tax dollars go to the city of Woodland. When people travel to Dixon, their tax dollars go to Dixon and Solano County. - ["ArlenAbraham"] - * Putting a Target in Davis would put a lot the local stores that supply similar goods out of business, namely mom and pops like Ace Hardware, Longs Drugs, The Gap and Office Max. ["LeightonHinkley"] - * My sarcasm detector just flew right off the scale on that one. At least, I hope its sarcasm. - ["AlexGarbutt"] - * Target rocks. Who gives a crap if local businesses go out of business. if they can't compete with a bulk goods store, then obviously they have nothing worthwhile to contribute to Davis except overpriced crap. Target donates money to local schools too. Think of the children. ["ApolloStumpy" - AS: (think of your children when they are working in a sweatshop owned by China jackass) ["DudeNude"] - Um....maybe the people who work for the local businesses, the people who shop at the local businesses, and the people who OWN the local businesses? You try working for Target, I can tell you first hand that it wouldn't be nearly as nice as working for a small independent business. -- ["BonnieStewart"]
Line 75:	Line 85:
- * Well, if a target comes to town, then fine. Davis has been screaming about the potential death of downtown for years. Borders was going to do it, Cost Plus was going to do it, etc... It seems to be the rallying cry. "Save our downtown with its pricey boutique shops that students rarely visit." Then they wonder about sales tax leakage. Davis is no longer the small college town it once was. In other news, I saw a sign on Road 102 near Interstate 5 in ["Woodland"] stating that they would be opening a ["Costco"] and ["Target"] at that location. So the mall target will probably close down when that happens. -["RogerClark"]	+ +

Target Debate

JamesSchwab — 2006-07-26 16:57:42

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 22:	Line 22:
- I agree. -NickSchmalenberger	+ I agree. -["NickSchmalenberger"]
Line 24:	Line 24:
- Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.—GrumpyoldGeek	+ Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.—["GrumpyoldGeek"]
Line 26:	Line 26:
- Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. —GrumpyoldGeek	+ Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. —["GrumpyoldGeek"]
Line 28:	Line 28:
- Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly developement forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. PaulThober	+ Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly developement forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"]
Line 30:	Line 30:
- Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? —GrumpyoldGeek	+ Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? —["GrumpyoldGeek"] + + The only way you could apply some hypocracy to Mace Ranch residents is if they were Davis residents before Mace Ranch was built, supported the development of Mace Ranch, moved to Mace Ranch, and now do not support Target. I think those individuals are few and far between. What you have are residents of Davis whose first homes were in Mace Ranch. They weren't here for the growth debate. Mr Thober, I'm not sure what you expected people to do- not move into Mace Ranch? Create a nation-wide boycott to stop anyone from purchasing a home in Mace Ranch? Target would be a useful store in Davis, but its location is less than satisfactory. ["JimSchwab"]

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-07-26 16:54:07

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 32:	Line 32:
	+ ==Stuff to Buy== + + I could use a target right now. People need their reasonably priced tube socks, towels, toothpaste, deodorant, etc. - JaimeRaba + + People have to drive (burning fuel) to Woodland, Sacramento or Vacaville to obtain things that people need on a daily basis at a reasonable price. It is in fact what people do, so why not spare the air and put in some establishments that will keep tax revenues in our cash-strapped county? - JaimeRaba + + BAHAHAHAHAHAHA... the truly cash strapped should stop wasting money on the car and BIKE more often. Then they'll have more money to buy stuff they really need. Anyone who can afford a car can afford the basic necessities. Target has a lot of JUNK. Those are not necessary to keep one alive. We have stores that sell food and they usually have other basic things people need. I have no car and do not go to Target but am still alive and well. Let those that can afford extra junk go the little bit of extra distance. Besides, Yolo County includes Woodland and West Sac - MarieHuynh + + No. See, by cash strapped county, I mean Yolo County has difficulty providing social services because it has a big population and not a big tax base. So they raise money primarily through taxing business. I think Prop 13 also negatively impacts this, because it sort of takes property taxes out of the mix. So, West Sacramento and Woodland's increasing amount of industrial complexes do provide somewhat of a tax basis, but then again they also have a lion's share of financial need. And one thing that is absolutely clear is that Davis students ALREADY go outside the county for their major purchases. So instead of spending money in Davis at the places openly criticized as being too expensive, they go elsewhere. And these are places you cannot bike to. Davis ALREADY has a big set of box stores that nobody really thinks of. In addition to the Cost Plus that mars the dorm-centric area of Davis, Davis also has several "box" car dealerships and "box" gyms and "box" auto repair shops. I think if one of these boxes (preferably in the mace/chiles area) held a store that would be more profitable to the inhabitants of Davis in terms of tax revenue and maybe actually giving them some value-priced merchandise, it would beneficial to all. -jr + When I think of major purchases, I think of computers, cars, and houses. I'd rather not have people buy lots of crap here or anywhere else, period. We don't NEED it. I don't care if it's cheap. And I really don't understand why students go and pay for memberships to gyms when they have a brand spanking new ARC. - MarieHuynh + Marie Huynh- People can buy whatever they feel like buying regardless if they NEED it or WANT it. If you are so insensed on people buying only what they need, I am sure multiple computers, pets, etc. also falls under the category of stuff "we don't need". Your opinions seem to only apply to what you think of others and not yourself. As for the Target issue, a couple "big box" stores will not hurt the so-called "small-town" appeal of Davis. Target is a matter of convience for cheap stuff. However, with the addition of more stores such as Walmart, Sams Club, Home Depot, etc. the balance between local business and large-scale retailers will negatively impact the small stores. - AshleyOrsaba + People need food, soap, shampoo, toothpaste, clothing, etc. That's what I'm talking about. That's what I'm talking about. And they waste tons of money buying it in Davis. In fact, I think the reason why students eat out so much, is because the supermarkets' mark-ups are so high. And if you need to buy a can opener? What do you do? You buy it at a 1000% markup at Safeway or Riteaid. It's not good. As far as gym membership, I think it's mostly people who don't have access to the ARC, or those who need 24-hour gym acess. Hey, you didn't even know there was a 24-Hour Fitness! - jr + + Yes, most people eat out at restaurants because Safeway is so expensive. That logic is so crystal clear that I think I will request that UCD give you an honorary degree. And can opener? Ever hear of Ace Hardware? I hadn't - that is why I got flogged at Rite Aid for $2.50. I so wish I had a Target-like store that sells them off at 22 cents each because I find myself needing to add one to my shiny collection nearly every week! But 4realz - Ace has almost everything that Target does and it's downtown. Get over it! + Aren't they closing that Target and mall down? I'm pretty sure I heard its going to become a walmart superstore. And it can be hard depending how much you plan to buy, or even if its not much, how hard it is to move it. (ex: 24 or 48 packs of toilet paper are a hassle when your hands are full). -ES + + Just think!! Soon there will be a big box store in every town in America! What beauty! We can get all of our food, unneeded consumer goods, clothes, and anything else we even slightly desire under one big roof. Hear that +
Line 34:	Line 52:
- I could use a target right now. People need their reasonably priced tube socks, towels, toothpaste, deodorant, etc. - ["JaimeRaba"] - - - * People have to drive (burning fuel) to Woodland, Sacramento or Vacaville to obtain things that people need on a daily basis at a reasonable price. It is in fact what people do, so why not spare the air and put in some establishments that will keep tax revenues in our cash-strapped county? - ["JaimeRaba"] - * BAHAHAHAHAHAHA... the truly cash strapped should stop wasting money on the car and BIKE more often. Then they'll have more money to buy stuff they really need. Anyone who can afford a car can afford the basic necessities. Target has a lot of JUNK. Those are not necessary to keep one alive. We have stores that sell food and they usually have other basic things people need. I have no car and do not go to Target but am still alive and well. Let those that can afford extr junk go the little bit of extra distance. Besides, Yolo county includes Woodland and West Sac - ["MarieHuynh"] - * No. See, by cash strapped county, I mean Yolo county has difficulty providing social services because it has a big population and not a big tax base. So they raise money primarily through taxing business. I think Prop 13 also negatively impacts this, because it sort of takes property taxes out of the mix. So, West Sacramento and Woodland's increasing amount of industrial complexes do provide somewhat of a tax basis, but then again they also have a lion's share of financial need. And one thing that is absolutely clear is that Davis students ALREADY go outside the county for their major purchases. So instead of spending money in Davis at the places openly criticized as being too expensive, they go elsewhere. And these are places you cannot bike to. Davis ALREADY has a big set of box stores that nobody really thinks of. In addition to the Cost Plus that mars the dorm-centric area of Davis, Davis also has several "box" car dealerships and "box" gyms and "box" auto repair shops. I think if one of these boxes (preferably in the mace/chiles area) held a store that would be more profitable to the inhabitants of Davis in terms of tax revenue and maybe actually giving them some value-priced merchandise, it would beneficial to all. -["JaimeRaba" jr] - * When I think of major purchases, I think of computers, cars, and houses. I'd rather not have people buy lots of crap here or anywhere else, period. We don't NEED it. I don't care if it's cheap. And I really don't understand why students go and pay for memberships to gyms when they have a brand spanking new ARC. - ["MarieHuynh"] - * Marie Huynh- People can buy whatever they feel like buying regardless if they NEED it or WANT it. If you are so insensed on people buying only what they need, I am sure multiple computers, pets, etc. also falls under the category of stuff "we don't need". Your opinions seem to only apply to what you think of others and not yourself. As for the Target issue, a couple "big box" stores will not hurt the so-called "small-town" appeal of Davis. Target is a matter of convience for cheap stuff. However, with the addition of more stores such as Walmart, Sams Club, Home Depot, etc. the balance between local business and large-scale retailers will negatively impact the small stores. - ["AshleyOrsaba"] - * People need food, soap, shampoo, toothpaste, clothing, etc. That's what I'm talking about. That's what I'm talking about. And they waste tons of money buying it in Davis. In fact, I think the reason why students eat out so much, is because the supermarkets' mark-ups are so high. And if you need to buy a can opener? What do you do? You buy it at a 1000% markup at Safeway or Riteaid. It's not good. As far as gym membership, I think it's mostly people who don't have access to the ARC, or those who need 24-hour gym acess. Hey, you didn't even know there ''was'' a 24-Hour Fitness! - ["JaimeRaba" jr] - * Yes, most people eat out at restaurants because Safeway is so expensive. That logic is so crystal clear that I think I will request that UCD give you an honorary degree. And can opener? Ever hear of Ace Hardware? I hadn't - that is why I got flogged at Rite Aid for $2.50. I so wish I had a Target-like store that sells them off at 22 cents each because I find myself needing to add one to my shiny collection nearly every week! But 4realz - Ace has almost everything that Target does and it's downtown. Get over it!
Line 51:	Line 59:
- * Just think!! Soon there will be a big box store in every town in America! What beauty! We can get all of our food, unneeded consumer goods, clothes, and anything else we even slightly desire under one big roof. Hear that	+

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-07-26 16:49:27

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 115:	Line 115:
- =Would you shop at a Target in Davis?=	+ + ==Yes on Target==
Line 119:	Line 120:
- - ==Yes on Target==

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-07-26 16:48:11

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 120:	Line 120:
- ===SPEAK UP!===	+ ==Yes on Target==
Line 131:	Line 131:
- = ...or would you rather keep Davis special and unique? =	+ ==No on Target==

Target Debate

SteveOstrowski — 2006-07-26 16:46:19

Getting somewhere

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 5:	Line 5:
- I love how Davis is small, and I can get anywhere without driving, but it is missing something essential: a store worth shopping at. Aside from grocery shopping, which I do mostly at albertsons for the convenience of the self checkout, I usually have to go out of town if I need something. Sure, I could probably find it somewhere in town, but it would either be from a large chain with huge markups, or a mom & pop's that seems intent on screwing me in the ass for some reason. I'm not poor, in the derogatory sense people use it around here, but I live on a budget, and paying an extra few dollars for every item I buy just doesn't make sense. At the same time, I don't feel good going to woodland or dixon every time I need something. This new Target could alleviate that. I understand the sympathy for local businesses, but if you need to have no competition to succeed, there may be something wrong with your business model. That is all. - ["GarrettTiemann"]	+ [[TableOfContents]] + + ==Small Town== + + I love how Davis is small, and I can get anywhere without driving, but it is missing something essential: a store worth shopping at. Aside from grocery shopping, which I do mostly at albertsons for the convenience of the self checkout, I usually have to go out of town if I need something. Sure, I could probably find it somewhere in town, but it would either be from a large chain with huge markups, or a mom & pop's that seems intent on screwing me in the ass for some reason. I'm not poor, in the derogatory sense people use it around here, but I live on a budget, and paying an extra few dollars for every item I buy just doesn't make sense. At the same time, I don't feel good going to woodland or dixon every time I need something. This new Target could alleviate that. I understand the sympathy for local businesses, but if you need to have no competition to succeed, there may be something wrong with your business model. That is all. - GarrettTiemann + + I don't want a big box store in Davis. It kills the whole idea of being a "small town". - RaynatoCastro + + Well, ever since they put in Cost Plus, that whole idea is out the door. And plus a Target out by 24-hour would be an area that would not be in the middle of town. And also, Davis is not actually small. It has too few stores to serve its population that exceeds 50,000. - JaimeRaba + + While Cost Plus is a chain, they pander to the inner-yuppie in us all. Target is where poor people shop, shesh. - PhilipNeustrom + + What do you mean davis has too few stores to serve its population? People have enough crap as it is. - MarieHuynh + + ==Mace Ranch== + + I find it wonderfully ironic that people in Mace Ranch are concerned about their quality of life being adversely affected by the building of a Target when they live in what is easily the ugliest, most unwanted developement ever to be foisted on the city of Davis. I only wish it were a Walmart or something even more heinous - an adult superstore, prison, feedlot, - something like that. PaulThober + I agree. -NickSchmalenberger + + Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.—GrumpyoldGeek + + Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. —GrumpyoldGeek + + Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly developement forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. PaulThober + + Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? —GrumpyoldGeek + + ==Other Arguments==
Line 9:	Line 36:
- I don't want a big box store in Davis. It kills the whole idea of being a "small town". - ["RaynatoCastro"] - * Well, ever since they put in Cost Plus, that whole idea is out the door. And plus a Target out by 24-hour would be an area that would not be in the middle of town. And also, Davis is not actually small. It has too few stores to serve its population that exceeds 50,000. - ["JaimeRaba"] - * While ["Cost Plus World Market" Cost Plus] is a chain, they pander to the inner-["Yuppies" yuppie] in us all. Target is where poor people shop, shesh. - ["PhilipNeustrom"] - What do you mean davis has too few stores to serve its population? People have enough crap as it is. - ["MarieHuynh"] - - I find it wonderfully ironic that people in Mace Ranch are concerned about their quality of life being adversely affected by the building of a Target when they live in what is easily the ugliest, most unwanted developement ever to be foisted on the city of Davis. I only wish it were a Walmart or something even more heinous - an adult superstore, prison, feedlot, - something like that. ["PaulThober"] - I agree. -["NickSchmalenberger"] - Nice. Spoken like a true apartment dweller. After daddy finishes paying your way through college and you go through all the pain and hassle and commitment of buying a house, come on back and tell us where you live so we can tell you it should have been a prison or feedlot. Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.--["GrumpyoldGeek"] - hehe. Pt, who you are responding to, isn't a college kid or an apartment dweller. it's ["PaulThober"] - the middle aged man who builds boats in the backyard and garage of a davis home. He deleted his wiki page a while ago, but [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=paul.jpg some] [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=Samantha.jpg pics] [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=lastepoxy.jpg remain.] Just figured you should know before lumping anyone against Mace Ranch as a stereotypical spoiled college kid. - Well then, I guess he doesn't have the excuse of youth and lack of wisdom. Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] - Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly developement forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"] - * Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? --["GrumpyoldGeek"]

Target Debate

RobertCook — 2006-06-29 14:27:30

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
- [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5510902] -

Target Debate

RobertCook — 2006-06-29 14:27:01

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
- ["http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5510902" Target NPR]	+ [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5510902]

Target Debate

RobertCook — 2006-06-29 14:26:11

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+ ["http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5510902" Target NPR] +

Target Debate

BonnieStewart — 2006-06-23 21:32:13

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 48:	Line 48:
- * Um....maybe the people who work for the local businesses, the people who shop at the local businesses, and the people who OWN the local businesses? You try working for Target, I can tell you first hand that it wouldn't be nearly as nice as working for a small independent business. -- ["BonnieStewart"]	+ *Um....maybe the people who work for the local businesses, the people who shop at the local businesses, and the people who OWN the local businesses? You try working for Target, I can tell you first hand that it wouldn't be nearly as nice as working for a small independent business. -- ["BonnieStewart"]

Target Debate

MichaelGiardina — 2006-06-20 11:10:08

Quote Integration? LOL.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 158:	Line 158:
	+ + ^ LOL - that's the funniest Include I've seen in a while. Yes, I guess this DOES need quote integration. - ["MichaelGiardina"]

Target Debate

TobinJones — 2006-06-20 11:05:02

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 129:	Line 129:
	+ *My concern isn't about the Davis laborers. It's about the workers in Saipan who have been coerced and threatened into working in factories for Target. I don't know that much about Target's first-world practices, but their third world ones are abominable.

Target Debate

GrumpyoldGeek — 2006-06-18 17:05:05

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 131:	Line 131:
-	+ I said it wasn't* a downtown Davis Labor issue and I didn't say I had a problem with 80% of the workers coming from Dixon and Woodland. Personally, I'd prefer an employer that paid good wages and benefits, but OTOH, if we run all the busnesses out of town that pay minimum wage, there wouldn't be a lot of restaurants, hotels and movie theaters left.

Target Debate

BrianYasmin — 2006-06-18 16:42:10

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 130:	Line 130:
	+ *So what's the problem if 80% of the workers would come from Dixon and Woodland? Does everybody who work in Davis have to live in Davis? What about those Mace Ranch owners who commute out of town everyday? There were few Target employees that commute to Woodland from Davis who spoke up during the last meeting. Good for Ace Hardware if their employees are happy with their jobs. If a Target two miles away from their store puts their jobs in jeopardy (which I doubt), they should be working harder and not oppose Target at the expense of Davis consumers. I think NIMBY is an arguable case although I support Target. Just want to say that the debate shouldn't be diffused into these worker's right, cheap crappy products (I have the right to choose to buy cheap Target products from China, it's my money), and sweat shop issues, unless we put ALL existing merchants in Davis (I've had a share of crappy stuff from aforementioned Davis merchants) under the same scrutiny. --["BY"]

Target Debate

GrumpyoldGeek — 2006-06-18 11:53:08

More dialog geek > thober

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 20:	Line 20:
	+ * Sour grapes. If you truly held Ramos responsible, you'd oppose his Second Street Crossings project. Instead you hold the residents of Mace Ranch responsible, most of which had never heard of Romos until well after they had moved in. I understand, you being a woodworker and all, not liking the styles of the houses or the street layout or the size of the development, or the walls, but not liking the people of Mace Ranch? Where'd that come from? Do you even know any of them? --["GrumpyoldGeek"]

Target Debate

PaulThober — 2006-06-18 11:11:11

Visited Mr. Geek's page and learned his gender.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 19:	Line 19:
- * Mr./Ms. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly developement forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"]	+ * Mr. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly developement forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"]

Target Debate

PaulThober — 2006-06-18 11:08:29

response

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 14:	Line 14:
- I find it wonderfully ironic that people in Mace Ranch are concerned about their quality of life being adversely affected by the building of a Target when they live in what is easily the ugliest, most unwanted developement ever to be foisted on the city of Davis. I only wish it were a Walmart or something even more heinous - an adult superstore, prison, feedlot, - something like that. ["PaulThober" pt]	+ I find it wonderfully ironic that people in Mace Ranch are concerned about their quality of life being adversely affected by the building of a Target when they live in what is easily the ugliest, most unwanted developement ever to be foisted on the city of Davis. I only wish it were a Walmart or something even more heinous - an adult superstore, prison, feedlot, - something like that. ["PaulThober"]
Line 18:	Line 18:
- *Well then, I guess he doesn't have the excuse of youth and lack of wisdom. Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["GrumpyoldGeek"]	+ Well then, I guess he doesn't have the excuse of youth and lack of wisdom. Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Mr. Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] + Mr./Ms. Geek, I certainly have the excuse of lack of wisdom, but whether I can claim youth is a matter of perspective. I can't show any NYMBYism as I don't have a back yard or any other kind of yard. And yes, I will cast the charge of NIMBY against the Mace Ranch residents. The developer, Mr Ramos, chose to disregard the wishes of the people of Davis. The present residents of Mace Ranch and their predessors chose to support Mr. Ramos by purchasing houses out in that wasteland. We got a monstrous, ugly developement forced upon us. The least you people could do is accept a little thing like Target. Believe me, it will fit right in. ["PaulThober"]
Line 21:	Line 22:
- * BAHAHAHAHAHAHA... the truly cash strapped should stop wasting money on the car and BIKE more often. Then they'll have more money to buy stuff they really need. Anyone who can afford a car can afford the basic necessities. Target has a lot of JUNK. Those are not necessary to keep one alive. We have stores that sell food and they usually have other basic things people need. I have no car and do not go to Target but am still alive and well. Let those that can afford extra junk go the little bit of extra distance. Besides, Yolo county includes Woodland and West Sac - ["MarieHuynh"]	+ * BAHAHAHAHAHAHA... the truly cash strapped should stop wasting money on the car and BIKE more often. Then they'll have more money to buy stuff they really need. Anyone who can afford a car can afford the basic necessities. Target has a lot of JUNK. Those are not necessary to keep one alive. We have stores that sell food and they usually have other basic things people need. I have no car and do not go to Target but am still alive and well. Let those that can afford extr junk go the little bit of extra distance. Besides, Yolo county includes Woodland and West Sac - ["MarieHuynh"]

Target Debate

GrumpyoldGeek — 2006-06-18 08:40:57

Target labor issue

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 127:	Line 127:
	+ *It's not a Davis downtown labor issue, but probably for different reasons than you think. If the Target is built, I wager that 80% of the labor force will be minorities from Dixon and Woodland. Why? Because they have a better work ethic and more flexible hours than most students. After all, how many UCD students are willing to put on the Target apron and push carts across the parking lot? How many UCD students will be able to schedule classes so that they can get out to the other side of town to put in 4 hours then come back across town? As to working conditions, I am sure that Target will not treat their employees as well as downtown merchants. I challenge you to go into Ace Hardware or Dibbert Lumber and ask the help if they are going to consider changing jobs to Target. --["GrumpyoldGeek"]

Target Debate

BrianYasmin — 2006-06-18 07:37:24

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 126:	Line 126:
	+ *What does how much Target pays have anything to do with this issue anyway? If they treat their employees so badly, THEY will suffer by not getting qualified people working for them. I bet there are plenty of employers in Davis downtown that can hardly compete with Target in terms of pay, benefit, and flexibility. Should we kick them out of Davis? Or would they be afraid that Davis employers can't compete with what Target offers their employees? From job opportunity perspective, there's absolutely nothing negative about having more options in Davis especially in a small town like Davis with tens of thousands of students. If you want to oppose Target, stick to NIMBY or No Big Box in my precious little town theories and don't waste time trying to make it an union/workers' right issue. --["BY"]

Target Debate

GrumpyoldGeek — 2006-06-17 08:41:44

Turned down rhetoric a bit

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 18:	Line 18:
- *Well then, I guess he doesn't have the excuse of youth and lack of wisdom. Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. In fact, I'd prefer to be miles away from the likes of him. --["GrumpyoldGeek"]	+ *Well then, I guess he doesn't have the excuse of youth and lack of wisdom. Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. --["GrumpyoldGeek"]

Target Debate

PaulThober — 2006-06-17 00:05:18

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 18:	Line 18:
- *Well then, I guess he doesn't have the excuse of youth and lack of wisdom. Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Thorber with my feedlot house if I had a choice. In fact, I'd prefer to be miles away from the likes of him. --["GrumpyoldGeek"]	+ *Well then, I guess he doesn't have the excuse of youth and lack of wisdom. Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Thober with my feedlot house if I had a choice. In fact, I'd prefer to be miles away from the likes of him. --["GrumpyoldGeek"]

Target Debate

PaulThober — 2006-06-17 00:03:27

Corrected

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 17:	Line 17:
- * hehe. Pt, who you are responding to, isn't a college kid or an apartment dweller. it's paul thober - the middle aged gentleman who builds boats in the backyard and garage of his davis ''home'' that I assume he owns. He deleted his wiki page a while ago, but [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=paul.jpg some] [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=Samantha.jpg pics] [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=lastepoxy.jpg remain.] Just figured you should know before lumping anyone against Mace Ranch as a stereotypical spoiled college kid.	+ * hehe. Pt, who you are responding to, isn't a college kid or an apartment dweller. it's ["PaulThober"] - the middle aged man who builds boats in the backyard and garage of a davis home. He deleted his wiki page a while ago, but [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=paul.jpg some] [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=Samantha.jpg pics] [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=lastepoxy.jpg remain.] Just figured you should know before lumping anyone against Mace Ranch as a stereotypical spoiled college kid.

Target Debate

GrumpyoldGeek — 2006-06-16 19:00:33

Another Mace Ranch rebuttal

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 18:	Line 18:
	+ *Well then, I guess he doesn't have the excuse of youth and lack of wisdom. Not only that, he shows the worst kind of NIMBYism while implying that Mace Ranch residents are guilty of it. Look, we didn't approve Mace Ranch, it was approved on his watch. We didn't have any input on the deal. I HAD to move to Davis for business reasons. I'd certainly prefer not to offend the likes of Thorber with my feedlot house if I had a choice. In fact, I'd prefer to be miles away from the likes of him. --["GrumpyoldGeek"] +

Target Debate

EdwinSaada — 2006-06-16 18:50:33

response.

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 17:	Line 17:
	+ * hehe. Pt, who you are responding to, isn't a college kid or an apartment dweller. it's paul thober - the middle aged gentleman who builds boats in the backyard and garage of his davis ''home'' that I assume he owns. He deleted his wiki page a while ago, but [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=paul.jpg some] [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=Samantha.jpg pics] [http://daviswiki.org/PaulThober?img=true&file=lastepoxy.jpg remain.] Just figured you should know before lumping anyone against Mace Ranch as a stereotypical spoiled college kid.

Target Debate

GrumpyoldGeek — 2006-06-16 18:03:47

minor change

Differences for Target Debate

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 16:	Line 16:
- *Nice. Spoken like a true apartment dweller. After daddy finishes paying your way through college, come on back and tell us where you live so we can tell you it should have been a prison or feedlot. Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.--["GrumpyoldGeek"]	+ *Nice. Spoken like a true apartment dweller. After daddy finishes paying your way through college and you go through all the pain and hassle and commitment of buying a house, come on back and tell us where you live so we can tell you it should have been a prison or feedlot. Here's the deal about Mace Ranch and Target. I moved here from San Pablo, just to give you a prison/feedlot reference, in 1998. I didn't want to live in Mace Ranch, I wanted to live in the country with a few acres and no Davis cops, Volvos or cell phones. My wife however, wanted a new home so Mace Ranch is where we ended up. Before we moved in, I checked out the area between my back fence and 2nd street. Guess what, it's zoned light industrial. I can live with that. Light industrial is quiet, low traffic and goes to sleep every night at 5pm or so. Great. Furthermore, after we moved in, we went to a planning committee session. A couple of new Mace Ranch neighbors had the audacity to suggest some changes regarding zoning. They were told, and let me emphasize this, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, that the general plan was crafted by years of work by longtime residents and it WOULD NOT be changed to accommodate upstart Mace Ranch residents. Well, foolish me, I took that to mean that the back forty behind my house would stay light industrial forever. I guess Ruth missed that meeting. So don't lay the NIMBY rap on me and my neighbors. We knew the rules and played by them when we moved in. And if we happen to enjoy the burrowing owls and coyotes in our backyard, remember that YOU are the one that would rather have about 20,000 yards of concrete, 500 SUV's and the associated snotlings, shopping carts and pavement instead of them.--["GrumpyoldGeek"]